PDA

View Full Version : Economics The "Official" Economy and Jobs thread.


Pages : [1] 2

BigRedChief
03-30-2010, 09:18 AM
Placeholder thread to have one single place to copy and paste recent released figures/news stories and a place to discuss those facts and derive meaning from said facts.:)

BigRedChief
03-30-2010, 09:18 AM
Home prices showing signs of strength: report
Case-Shiller data finds housing prices fell smallest annual amount in 3 years
By Alan Zibel
The Associated Press
updated 8:08 a.m. CT, Tues., March. 30, 2010

<SCRIPT language=javascript> function UpdateTimeStamp(pdt) { var n = document.getElementById("udtD"); if(pdt != '' && n && window.DateTime) { var dt = new DateTime(); pdt = dt.T2D(pdt); if(dt.GetTZ(pdt)) {n.innerHTML = dt.D2S(pdt,(('false'.toLowerCase()=='false')?false:true));} } } UpdateTimeStamp('634055512958900000');</SCRIPT>
NEW YORK - Home prices showed the smallest annual decline in almost three years in January, indicating there are surprising areas of strength in the housing market.

The Standard & Poor's/Case-Shiller 20-city home price index fell just 0.7 percent from last year on a seasonally adjusted basis. The index reading of 146.32 was almost in line with analysts expectations, according to a survey by Thomson Reuters.
Better still, prices rose 0.3 percent from December to January, the eighth consecutive monthly gain. Among the 20 cities in the index, 12 rose.

The index, released Tuesday, is up nearly 4 percent from its bottom in May 2009, but still almost 30 percent below its May 2006 peak.


Copyright 2010 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

<SCRIPT>var url=location.href;var i=url.indexOf('/did/') + 1;if(i==0){i=url.indexOf('/print/1/') + 1;}if(i==0){i=url.indexOf('&print=1');}if(i>0){url = url.substring(0,i);document.write('URL: '+url+' (http://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/'+url+')
');if (typeof FDCPUrl == 'function'){FDCPUrl();}else if(window.print){window.print()}else{alert('To print his page press Ctrl-P on your keyboard \nor choose print from your browser or device after clicking OK');}}</SCRIPT>URL: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/36097084/ns/business-real_estate/ (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/36097084/ns/business-real_estate/)

petegz28
03-30-2010, 09:22 AM
I called a bull market the other week. Several of you disagreed with me. I said the SP500 would run to 1200 before making a correction. We may not make it quite that high but we still have a shot. Keep doubting me.....:D

The Mad Crapper
03-30-2010, 09:30 AM
Another one? Rest assure, it'll blow up in your face...

Again.

BigRedChief
03-30-2010, 04:53 PM
Positive March jobs numbers to bolster Obama, but horizon looks cloudy


By Ian Swanson - 03/30/10 01:09 PM ET

The economy is expected to have added hundreds of thousands of jobs in March, bolstering the Obama administration’s arguments that the $787 billion stimulus package is having an impact.

Private forecasts on the unemployment report to be released on Friday predict as many as 200,000 jobs will have been created by the economy in March.

Economist Mark Zandi, who advised Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) during the 2008 campaign and Democrats during the crafting of the stimulus, projects 175,000 jobs will be added to payrolls this month.

Zandi’s estimate is that 100,000 of those jobs will be created by the Census Bureau, which is hiring hundreds of thousands of workers to go door to door to get people to fill out their censuses.

Another 50,000 jobs are a bounce from February, when Zandi and other economists believe harsh winter storms contributed to lower-than-expected hiring. The economy shed 36,000 jobs in February, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics.

Either way, the numbers will provide a shot of good economic news for President Barack Obama, who is already enjoying the fruits of Democrats’ healthcare victory.

If the economy does add 175,000 jobs, it would be the most created since March 2007, when the economy added 239,000 jobs.

Democrats nervous about the fall elections want to push the storyline that their efforts with the stimulus helped stave off a new Great Depression. An economy that lost nearly 3.7 million jobs in the months that immediately followed Obama’s election is now moving forward.

The March figures would boost that narrative, since it would be the first time the economy had added a significant number of jobs in three years.
Yet there are some clouds on the horizon.

It’s unclear whether the 9.7 percent unemployment rate will drop at all, even with the positive job numbers. Also, the help from census hiring is a temporary boost at best. Most census workers will only be employed for a matter of months.

There’s also the need to create jobs for those who left the workforce. Millions of workers gave up looking for jobs during the height of the recession. The return of those workers to hiring lines will put pressure on the unemployment rate to rise.

Goldman Sachs on Tuesday projected a small improvement in the labor market. It recorded a drop in the gap between jobs available and jobs that are hard to get.

The gap is the best it has been since August 2008, Goldman said in the report, but is still indicative of a fragile labor market.

Separately, there was more mixed news on the housing front, which continues to struggle.

The Case-Shiller Home Price Index reported that home prices in January rose for the eighth straight month, but a separate index kept by Federal Housing Finance Agency showed prices dropping.

A continued glut of homes that are vacant or for rent suggests prices could fall as much as another 5 percent this year, according to a research note published Tuesday by IHS Global Insight.

Zandi said job growth won’t be strong enough until late in 2010 or early in 2011 to bring down unemployment significantly.

“A lack of credit for small businesses and still weak business confidence will slow the job market recovery,” he said.

Source:
http://thehill.com/news-by-subject/finance-economy/89809-positive-march-jobs-numbers-to-bolster-obama-but-horizon-cloudy (http://thehill.com/news-by-subject/finance-economy/89809-positive-march-jobs-numbers-to-bolster-obama-but-horizon-cloudy)

Chief Henry
03-30-2010, 05:04 PM
why change from the other thread

Chief Henry
03-30-2010, 05:05 PM
4 more banks were taken over by the FDIC last Friday, 7 the week before. A total of 41 so far this year.....140 were taken over last year.

BigRedChief
03-30-2010, 07:36 PM
why change from the other threadbecause some thought it was too positive a thread. Stacking the deck, I guess. They want the country to fail. Or so I hear...:rolleyes:

The Mad Crapper
03-31-2010, 09:32 AM
because some thought it was too positive a thread. Stacking the deck, I guess. They want the country to fail. Or so I hear...:rolleyes:

http://www.moonbattery.com/assets_c/2010/03/26947_382612112091_501387091_3722159_1429837_n-thumb-500x661-1436.jpg

The Mad Crapper
03-31-2010, 09:53 AM
U.S. Standard of Living Unsustainable Without Drastic Action, Former Top Govt. Accountant Says
Posted Mar 31, 2010 10:18am EDT by Heesun Wee in Investing, Recession
Related: ^dji, ^gspc, dia, spy, tlt, IXJ, xlv

President Obama might have signed the health-care reform bill into law last week, but the debate rages on. Opponents are gearing up for another attack on the the bill, partly because many of its provisions will be phased in slowly.

But the outrage over health-care really isn't about the actual bill, says our guest David Walker, former U.S. Comptroller General and head of the Government Accountability Office. "It was really more about the fact that government is out of touch and out of control."

Who will bail out America? A longtime budget hawk and currently CEO of the Peter G. Peterson Foundation, Walker says America's growing long-term debt is dangerously close to passing a "tipping point" that could trigger soaring interest rates and a plummeting dollar. In a worst case scenario, that could trigger a "global depression," he says, warning: "Nobody's going to bail out America."

With the U.S. facing $50 trillion in unfunded liabilities and around $62 trillion in total long-term debt, what worries Walker most is what happens after the recession dissipates, as detailed here. "I'm less concerned with the short-term deficits than I am the fact that we're not doing anything about those structural deficits that people used to call long-term," he says. "But the long-term is here."

What's ultimately at stake may be nothing short of Americans' faith in government and our standard of living. "There is a way forward. There is hope," Walker says. "But we need to actually make some tough choices."

Walker, author of a new book, "Comeback America," argues the U.S. needs to tackle four key issues if the nation wants to recover:

* Impose tough budget limits
* Reform Social Security
* Cut health-care costs
* Reform the U.S. tax system

Click "more" to get Walker's take on the Tea Party movement, and to embed and share the video.

petegz28
03-31-2010, 10:44 AM
So, BRC, where is today's news? ADP Jobs report? Factory Orders???

kcfanXIII
03-31-2010, 01:22 PM
Placeholder thread to have one single place to copy and paste recent released figures/news stories and a place to discuss those facts and derive meaning from said facts.:)

what are these "facts" you speak of?

Chief Henry
03-31-2010, 01:33 PM
So, BRC, where is today's news? ADP Jobs report? Factory Orders???

What Jobs :rolleyes: Has Obama created one new job since being in office ?

Don't count those 15,000 new IRS jobs created by Obama's cluster care either. Thats not been fully implimented yet.

petegz28
03-31-2010, 11:56 PM
What Jobs :rolleyes: Has Obama created one new job since being in office ?

Don't count those 15,000 new IRS jobs created by Obama's cluster care either. Thats not been fully implimented yet.

The ADP jobs report came out today and showed a 23,000 loss of jobs for March. Now, keep that in mind when Friday comes and the jobs report from the Fed Gov shows a gain. The ADP report does NOT include government jobs. The census, IRS and other federal jobs will bolster the numbers.

BigRedChief
04-01-2010, 08:02 AM
So, BRC, where is today's news? ADP Jobs report? Factory Orders???It's not my job to post every artickle from every field. jeeezz :LOL:

I don't even know what a ADP jobs report is moron.

CoMoChief
04-01-2010, 08:51 AM
This thread shouldn't have any posts in it...

Why?

Because there are no jobs. And our economy isn't even worth talking about.

BigRedChief
04-01-2010, 08:58 AM
This thread shouldn't have any posts in it...

Why?

Because there are no jobs. And our economy isn't even worth talking about.
Man, your funnier than Shecky Greene. You work in the Catskills?

BigRedChief
04-01-2010, 12:22 PM
Signs of a spring thaw for struggling economy
Manufacturing, hiring improve, but job recovery will likely still take years
By John W. Schoen
Senior producer
updated 11:54 a.m. CT, Thurs., April 1, 2010

<SCRIPT language=javascript> function UpdateTimeStamp(pdt) { var n = document.getElementById("udtD"); if(pdt != '' && n && window.DateTime) { var dt = new DateTime(); pdt = dt.T2D(pdt); if(dt.GetTZ(pdt)) {n.innerHTML = dt.D2S(pdt,(('false'.toLowerCase()=='false')?false:true));} } } UpdateTimeStamp('634057376489030000');</SCRIPT>
A string of fresh economic data Thursday, from a bounce back in manufacturing to a drop in new claims for unemployment insurance, offered hopeful signs of spring. But as the U.S. continues to try to shake off the worst downturn since the great Depression, there’s still a lot of storm damage to clean up.

The best news came from a closely watched monthly report from a purchasing executives trade group, the Institute for Supply Management, which found the U.S. manufacturing sector in March grew at its strongest pace in 5 1/2 years. As industrial companies continue to lead the recovery, the ISM index jumped to 59.6 in March from 56.5 in February — the eighth straight month of expansion — and much better than economists had expected. A score above 50 indicates growth.
After cutting inventories to the bone during the recession, companies have begun restocking warehouses and store shelves as they see early signs demand is picking up again. New orders for goods also picked up in March. That could bode well for future expansion of production.

It could also signal the end of an historic wave of layoffs that sidelined some 8.4 million workers. Even as hiring picks up again, it will take a long time to repair the damage to economy from the bursting of the housing bubble and the near collapse of the financial markets.

"The unemployment rate is still terribly high,” Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner told NBC's "Today" show. “And it's going to stay unacceptably high for a long period of time."

With the housing market still struggling to find a bottom and commercial real estate market mired in a deep recession, the construction industry remains badly damaged by the economic collapse that began more than two years ago. On Thursday, the Commerce Department reported that construction spending fell for the fourth straight month during February to the slowest rate in nearly 7-1/2 years.


Consumer spending, while also showing recent signs of strength, is still weak by historical standards. Despite the Federal Reserve’s unprecedented policy of holding short-term interest rates at near zero, rates on long-term bonds — which are based on investor sentiment — have recently begun ticking higher. That’s pushed mortgage rates higher as well, a trend that could weigh on the fragile housing market.
On Thursday, a survey released by Freddie Mac showed that U.S. mortgage rates rose for a third straight week, inching above 5 percent to their second highest level this year.

Owners of small businesses report that while they see positive signs, they’re still not quite confident enough to begin hiring in large numbers, according to Stuart Hoffman, chief economist at PNC Financial which just completed its latest small business survey.

“There’s still caution out there," said Hoffman. "But I would say this is a case where the small businesses, that do create a lot of jobs, are saying they're right on the cusps and I think we're going to see some of that in the next couple of jobs reports."


There are other signs that “green shoots” of spring may be poking through on the job front, including a Thursday report showing a drop in new claims for unemployment insurance.

“Recruiters around the country are saying that they are busier now than at any time since before the recession,” said Stuart Schweitzer, global market strategist at JPMorgan Private Bank. “And that is true across all geographies and almost all industries, commercial construction is the exception.”


So far, the early signs of life in the job market isn't showing up in hiring data. Private employers shed 23,000 more jobs in March, casting doubt on forecasts for job growth ahead of Friday's employment report from the government. Economists had expected the ADP Employer Services report, jointly developed with Macroeconomic Advisers LLC, to show a gain of 40,000 private-sector jobs in March.

Still, economists have high expectations for Friday’s jobs report, with most looking for the report to show a net gain of 200,000 jobs in March. That would be the first convincing job gains since the recession began in Dec., 2007.

The report will come with some critical asterisks. A large portion of those jobs are for temporary positions with the Census Dept. as it ramps up its decennial count of American households. The March jobs report is also expected benefit from an aberration in the data for February, when a major storm disrupted the many workplaces and may have depressed the official employment level.

A sizeable gain in the employment data for March could also support the view that the U.S. economy has reached a point where hiring can begin again at a sustained pace. Hiring is typically one of the last indicators to turn positive at the end of a recession, as businesses wait to see a consistent gain in demand before taking on new workers.

Much of the increased workload for the past few quarters has fallen to existing workers. That’s a big reason for huge gains during the last two quarters in productivity, which simple measures how much output is generated by each worker. For the past six months, the data show, Americans have been working a lot harder for the same paycheck. Eventually, employers have to start hiring again.


“There are lags with respect to the labor market,” said Michael Darda, chief economist at MKM Partners “But importantly, all of the indicators that you would need to see turned before jobs (increase) have turned.”
But even if the economy begins producing another 200,000 jobs a month on a sustained basis —which is by no means certain — the near-double-digit unemployment rate will remain stubbornly high for a long time. Deutsche Bank economist Joe Lavorgna estimates it could be four to five years before the economy returns to so-called “full employment” where anyone who wants a job can get one. Until then, the “recovery” won’t feel like it to many Americans.

“We've just opened up so much slack in the economy, so it's going to take a long time, a lot of growth, to get back to where we were before this thing happened,” said Lavorgna. "A lot of people are long-term unemployed at this point. So, it's going to be a long, slow slog."

http://msnbcmedia.msn.com/i/MSNBC/Components/ArtAndPhoto-Fronts/AP_GRAPHICS/AP-MANUFACTURING-040110.gif


© 2010 msnbc.com Reprints
<SCRIPT>var url=location.href;var i=url.indexOf('/did/') + 1;if(i==0){i=url.indexOf('/print/1/') + 1;}if(i==0){i=url.indexOf('&print=1');}if(i>0){url = url.substring(0,i);document.write('URL: '+url+' (http://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/'+url+')
');if (typeof FDCPUrl == 'function'){FDCPUrl();}else if(window.print){window.print()}else{alert('To print his page press Ctrl-P on your keyboard \nor choose print from your browser or device after clicking OK');}}</SCRIPT>URL: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/36134546/ns/business-eye_on_the_economy/ (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/36134546/ns/business-eye_on_the_economy/)

mlyonsd
04-01-2010, 01:36 PM
Yes, we've already gotten the memo where we're supposed to over look the unemployment rate when it comes to grading Obama and the dems economic policies.

Chief Henry
04-01-2010, 02:40 PM
Yes, we've already gotten the memo where we're supposed to over look the unemployment rate when it comes to grading Obama and the dems economic policies.

I wonder how many new jobs will be created by the census stuff ? I guess we'll know more on Friday.

Has any new PRIVATE sector jobs been created since Obama became President ?

The Mad Crapper
04-01-2010, 02:42 PM
Obama Fiscal Policy: Financial Armageddon



President Obama's fiscal 2011 budget will generate nearly $10 trillion in cumulative budget deficits over the next 10 years, $1.2 trillion more than the administration projected, and raise the federal debt to 90 percent of the nation's economic output by 2020, the Congressional Budget Office reported Thursday.

In its 2011 budget, which the White House Office of Management and Budget (OMB) released Feb. 1, the administration projected a 10-year deficit total of $8.53 trillion. After looking it over, CBO said in its final analysis, released Thursday, that the president's budget would generate a combined $9.75 trillion in deficits over the next decade.

The upshot of this is very un-good, and that's no April Fool's joke.

The federal public debt, which was $6.3 trillion ($56,000 per household) when Mr. Obama entered office amid an economic crisis, totals $8.2 trillion ($72,000 per household) today, and it's headed toward $20.3 trillion (more than $170,000 per household) in 2020, according to CBO's deficit estimates.

That figure would equal 90 percent of the estimated gross domestic product in 2020, up from 40 percent at the end of fiscal 2008. By comparison, America's debt-to-GDP ratio peaked at 109 percent at the end of World War II, while the ratio for economically troubled Greece hit 115 percent last year.

BigRedChief
04-02-2010, 07:21 AM
http://money.cnn.com/2010/04/01/news/economy/jobs_outlook/index.htm?hpt=T1

Finally, an end to job losses

By Chris Isidore, senior writerApril 2, 2010: 7:54 AM ET

NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) -- The long nightmare of job losses appears to be just about over
When the Labor Department reports its monthly employment readings for March on Friday, economists are forecasting a gain of 184,000 job.

If that happens, it would be only the second month with a positive reading since December of 2007, and the biggest jump in employment since March of that year, a good nine months before the official start of the recession.

But even if the economists are right in their forecast, they caution not to get too excited about a report of a big jump in jobs. There are a number of short-term factors likely to distort the reading.

Storms in the middle of February caused a number of people to be out of work during the week that the Labor Department does its monthly survey of employers, so their return to work would be counted as a gain in the March reading. Some estimates say more than 100,000 of the gain could be weather-related.

Even more significantly the Census Bureau has started to hire the more than 1 million temporary workers it will need this year to complete the once-in-a-decade headcount of the U.S. population. That also could add more than 100,000 jobs to payroll in March.

Modest gains ahead. Even if the March reading is built on such ephemeral gains, many economists say they're seeing signs that the labor market is at a more significant turning point, and that employers are about to start adding jobs.

But most believe that while the labor market may have turned a corner, it's likely to see only modest improvements the rest of the year.
"This is the beginning of things getting better, but it's just getting better slowly," said Barry Ritholtz, CEO and director of equity research at Fusion IQ.

"We're not looking for 300,000-500,000 monthly job gains we saw in the 90s. It's going to be more in the 50,000 to 200,000 range the rest of the year."

<!-- REAP --><!--startclickprintexclude--><!-- KEEP -->0:00 /1:52Geithner: Job rebound near<SCRIPT type=text/javascript>vidConfig.push({videoArray: ["/video/news/2010/03/25/n_Geithner_job_recovery_near.cnnmoney.json"], collapsed:false});</SCRIPT> <!--endclickprintexclude--><!-- /REAP -->
The number of workers on payrolls that gets so much attention in the Labor Department report comes from a survey of employers. But the report also lists the responses of a separate survey of households that it uses to estimate the unemployment rate, and that survey has already shown a big jump in the number of Americans saying they have jobs -- 541,000 in January and another 308,000 in February.

That survey is typically more volatile and considered less reliable than the employer survey by labor economists. But Ritholtz said history shows a turnaround in the household survey job count can signal a change to come in the more widely-followed payroll number.

"We sometimes get an early read on improvement in the labor market because the household survey does a better job picking the start-ups and the small firms," he said.

Beyond the government numbers. One hopeful piece of real data is an improvement in the amount of income tax withheld by employers in March. That reading is the basis of an estimate of a 280,000 gain in employment in the month by investment firm TrimTabs, and a 300,000 increase in jobs by the research service DailyJobsUpdate.com.

The tax withholding information suggests that the labor market is actually stronger than the much publicized payroll reading is likely to show Friday, said Charles Biderman, CEO of TrimTabs.

But even Biderman doesn't believe that employers are ready to go on the kind of hiring binge necessary to make a significant dent in the unemployment rate, which stood at 9.7% in February.

He thinks unemployment will still be near 9% at the end of the year, even if the payrolls start rising by about 200,000 a month the way he expects. That pace of job growth barely covers the growth in population and the number of discouraged workers returning to work.

"We think that things are getting modestly better," he said. "I just don't see any engine of growth that will take us above a modestly growing economy."

Matt Trivisonno, the founder of DailyJobsUpdate.com, said the improvement in the withholding tax reading is significant because historically it only changes direction when the labor market itself is undergoing a fundamental shift. But he said it can still take months for the overall number of workers on payrolls to post steady, sustained improvement.

"I would say it's definitely improving, but there are headwinds," he said. "During the last recovery we had a monster real estate boom going on. We don't have that kind of jobs producer this time around."
Another estimate by payroll services firm ADP on Wednesday estimated there was a 23,000 drop (http://money.cnn.com/2010/03/31/news/economy/ADP_private_sector_payrolls/index.htm?postversion=2010033109) in private sector employment in March, a disappointment for economists who had forecast an increase of 40,000 jobs.

Joel Prakken, chairman of Macroeconomic Advisors, the firm that prepares the ADP reading, says despite the disappointing reading, he also believes the labor market is reaching a turning point. He's hopeful that once Americans believe the labor market has improved, it will help to unleash a lot of pent-up spending, which in turn could spur growth and job gains.
"What really has changed the amount of uncertainty that people are attaching to the wage and salaries," he said. "The very fact that employment has stabilized is one reason consumer spending has revived and performed better than many forecasters were fearing."

BigRedChief
04-02-2010, 07:41 AM
Economy adds 162,000 jobs as recovery builds
Unemployment rate stays unchanged at 9.7 percent for third month in row
Reuters
updated 7:36 a.m. CT, Fri., April 2, 2010

<SCRIPT language=javascript> function UpdateTimeStamp(pdt) { var n = document.getElementById("udtD"); if(pdt != '' && n && window.DateTime) { var dt = new DateTime(); pdt = dt.T2D(pdt); if(dt.GetTZ(pdt)) {n.innerHTML = dt.D2S(pdt,(('false'.toLowerCase()=='false')?false:true));} } } UpdateTimeStamp('634058085758330000');</SCRIPT>
WASHINGTON - U.S. non-farm payrolls, a key measure of the economy's health, rose in March as the private sector stepped up hiring at the fastest pace in almost 3 years.

Employers added 162,000 jobs last month, the Labor Department said on Friday, leaving the unemployment rate steady at 9.7 percent for the third straight month. The payrolls increase was the largest since March 2007, and also reflected temporary hiring for the census.

Payroll figures for January were revised to show a 14,000 gain, while February was adjusted to show only a loss of 14,000.

Analysts polled by Reuters had expected non-farm payrolls to rise 190,000 last month and the unemployment rate to hold steady at 9.7 percent. The median projection from the 20 economists who have forecast payrolls most accurately over the past year predicted 200,000 jobs were created in March.

The labor market has lagged the economy's recovery from the worst downturn since the 1930s, creating a political challenge for President Barack Obama.

Job growth is critical to keeping alive the recovery, which started in the second half of 2009, once government stimulus efforts and a boost from businesses' rebuilding inventories fade.

"Employment growth is the last piece of the puzzle. We need job growth and labor income growth in order to have a sustainable economic recovery," said Zach Pandl, an economist at Nomura Securities International in New York.

About 48,000 temporary workers for the decennial census were hired last month, while private payrolls jumped 123,000, the highest since May 2007.

Employment last month was also lifted by a snap back from February's weather-related losses. Since December 2007, payrolls had contracted every month except last November, January, and now March.

The bounce back in employment could take some pressure off Obama, who has made putting back Americans to work a top priority. Since the start of the downturn about 8.2 million jobs have been lost.

Analysts reckon the state of the job market will determine when the Federal Reserve will start raising benchmark interest rates, which are currently near zero.

The U.S. central bank has promised to keep overnight rates ultra low for an extended period, citing subdued inflation and the likelihood the economic recovery will be moderate.

In the goods-producing sector, manufacturing added 17,000 jobs in March and construction payrolls grew 15,000. Payrolls in the services sector increased as retail employment climbed 14,900. Government employment increased 39,000, reflecting the temporary hiring for the census.

The average workweek for all employees rose to 34 hours from 33.9 hours in February.

Copyright 2010 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
<SCRIPT>var url=location.href;var i=url.indexOf('/did/') + 1;if(i==0){i=url.indexOf('/print/1/') + 1;}if(i==0){i=url.indexOf('&print=1');}if(i>0){url = url.substring(0,i);document.write('URL: '+url+' (http://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/'+url+')
');if (typeof FDCPUrl == 'function'){FDCPUrl();}else if(window.print){window.print()}else{alert('To print his page press Ctrl-P on your keyboard \nor choose print from your browser or device after clicking OK');}}</SCRIPT>URL: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/36146930/ns/business-stocks_and_economy/ (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/36146930/ns/business-stocks_and_economy/)

mlyonsd
04-02-2010, 08:02 AM
Government employment increased 39,000, reflecting the temporary hiring for the census.



Heh.

BigRedChief
04-02-2010, 08:11 AM
Heh.WTH are you laughing at? These increased #'s wern't all government jobs, not even close.

Private employers added 123,000 jobs, the most since May 2007.
Manufacturers added 17,000 jobs, the third straight month of gains. Temporary help services added 40,000, while health care (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/36146930/ns/business-stocks_and_economy/#) added 37,000. Leisure and hospitality added 22,000.

<TABLE style="PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 15px; PADDING-BOTTOM: 0px; PADDING-TOP: 5px" cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 align=right border=0 itxtvisited="1"><TBODY itxtvisited="1"><TR itxtvisited="1"><TD itxtvisited="1"></TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>
Even the beleaguered construction industry added 15,000 positions, though that likely reflects a rebound from February, when major snowstorms may have kept many construction workers off payrolls

mlyonsd
04-02-2010, 08:15 AM
WTH are you laughing at? These increased #'s wern't all government jobs, not even close.

Private employers added 123,000 jobs, the most since May 2007.
Manufacturers added 17,000 jobs, the third straight month of gains. Temporary help services added 40,000, while health care (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/36146930/ns/business-stocks_and_economy/#) added 37,000. Leisure and hospitality added 22,000.

<TABLE style="PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 15px; PADDING-BOTTOM: 0px; PADDING-TOP: 5px" cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 align=right border=0 itxtvisited="1"><TBODY itxtvisited="1"><TR itxtvisited="1"><TD itxtvisited="1"></TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>
Even the beleaguered construction industry added 15,000 positions, though that likely reflects a rebound from February, when major snowstorms may have kept many construction workers off payrolls

I'm laughing at the fact out of 162,000 new jobs, 39,000 of them are government temps. Temps mind you.

BigRedChief
04-02-2010, 08:17 AM
I'm laughing at the fact out of 162,000 new jobs, 39,000 of them are government temps. Temps mind you.so, they are census jobs, happened under Reagan and Bush and every other President. It's a constitutional thing. Look it up. :rolleyes:

No way to paint these #'s but as a good thing. 129,00 new jobs in a month is a helluva lot better than losing 750,000 jobs a month when Obama took office.

Hiring by manufactures up for 3 straight months now. Most jobs added since May 2007, biggest increase in jobs in 3 friggin years. Only the 3rd month since 2008 that employers didn't cut jobs. Tell me how these facts are a bad thing for America?

BigRedChief
04-02-2010, 08:24 AM
http://i2.cdn.turner.com/money/2010/04/02/news/economy/jobs_march/chart_job_losses_040210.top.gif

stevieray
04-02-2010, 08:24 AM
I'm laughing at the fact out of 162,000 new jobs, 39,000 of them are government temps. Temps mind you.


you're wasting your time. it isn't about issues, it's about cult of personality.

BigRedChief
04-02-2010, 08:26 AM
you're wasting your time. it isn't about issues, it's about cult of personality.remember this mantra made famous under Clinton......it's the economy, stupid

so are you saying no big deal. This job report is not positive news?

mlyonsd
04-02-2010, 08:28 AM
so, they are census jobs, happened under Reagan and Bush and every other President. It's a constitutional thing. Look it up. :rolleyes:

No way to paint these #'s but as a good thing. 129,00 new jobs in a month is a helluva lot better than losing 750,000 jobs a month when Obama took office.

Hiring by manufactures up for 3 straight months now. Most jobs added since May 2007. Tell me how these facts are a bad thing for America?
Who said they were a bad thing for America? I'm laughing at how the numbers are presented and how you get all gaga about this sort of news.

I notice you didn't mention the irony that we added jobs and the unemployment rate stayed the same.

When Obama has recovered the trillion dollar stimulus package money he borrowed last year and unemployment is back down to 6% feel free to put up the Mission Accomplished sign.

stevieray
04-02-2010, 08:29 AM
remember this mantra made famous under Clinton......it's the economy, stupid

so are you saying no big deal. This job report is not positive news?

IMO, commercial real estate is a better indicator of growth or decline.

Saul Good
04-02-2010, 08:37 AM
If you only read BRC's posts, you'd think we were in the roaring twenties. No wonder Dems think Fox is biased. Fair and balanced has no place in Obama's world.

BigRedChief
04-02-2010, 08:54 AM
If you only read BRC's posts, you'd think we were in the roaring twenties. No wonder Dems think Fox is biased. Fair and balanced has no place in Obama's world.Look at Fox's current home page. Not a word about the job numbers. But they got a big piece on the Apple I tablet.

whatsmynameagain
04-02-2010, 08:56 AM
Who said they were a bad thing for America? I'm laughing at how the numbers are presented and how you get all gaga about this sort of news.

I notice you didn't mention the irony that we added jobs and the unemployment rate stayed the same.

When Obama has recovered the trillion dollar stimulus package money he borrowed last year and unemployment is back down to 6% feel free to put up the Mission Accomplished sign.


death to america. that fuckin obama should snap his fingers and make everything perfect. i expected him to have this mess cleaned in 3 months. i hope we fail, we need more job losses
Posted via Mobile Device

BigRedChief
04-02-2010, 08:56 AM
Who said they were a bad thing for America? I'm laughing at how the numbers are presented and how you get all gaga about this sort of news.

I notice you didn't mention the irony that we added jobs and the unemployment rate stayed the same.

When Obama has recovered the trillion dollar stimulus package money he borrowed last year and unemployment is back down to 6% feel free to put up the Mission Accomplished sign.I've said I don't think unemployment will ever go below 7-8% again in the good ole USA because we don't make chit anymore. Thats just who we are. It's not a Dem or Republican thing. We pay our workers more than other countries so its hard to compete with developing countries in a lot of fields. Just the facts.

petegz28
04-02-2010, 08:58 AM
Unemployment stayed t 9.7% and actually went up if you take it to the 3 decimal place. Underemployment climbed to 20.9%

While the numbers are better we are not anywhere near the level we need to be. And a bunch of the number that look good now will drop off after May.

BigRedChief
04-02-2010, 08:58 AM
IMO, commercial real estate is a better indicator of growth or decline.Commerical real estate? Welll then Bush really screwed the pooch in that field.

whatsmynameagain
04-02-2010, 09:00 AM
Look at Fox's current home page. Not a word about the job numbers. But they got a big piece on the Apple I tablet.



they pick and choose. its hard to play doom and gloom with positive reports. drudge does the same shit showing the stock market only when its down but never when its up. thats how they prey on these desperate retards stupidity.
Posted via Mobile Device

BigRedChief
04-02-2010, 09:00 AM
Unemployment stayed t 9.7% and actually went up if you take it to the 3 decimal place. Underemployment climbed to 20.9%

While the numbers are better we are not anywhere near the level we need to be. And a bunch of the number that look good now will drop off after May.Who is saying its where it needs to be? Far from it but IMHO if people think we are ever returing to 3-4% unemployment #'s they are mistaken.

Pete, you see to follow this real close, you think we will see 3% unemployment again?

whatsmynameagain
04-02-2010, 09:05 AM
Who is saying its where it needs to be? Far from it but IMHO if people think we are ever returing to 3-4% unemployment #'s they are mistaken.

Pete, you see to follow this real close, you think we will see 3% unemployment again?

let me answer for pete, "yes we will once republicans are back in power and not negro commie socialist nazis"
Posted via Mobile Device

Chief Henry
04-02-2010, 09:05 AM
Unemployment stayed t 9.7% and actually went up if you take it to the 3 decimal place. Underemployment climbed to 20.9%

While the (short term) numbers are better we are not anywhere near the level we need to be. And a bunch of the number that look good now will drop off after May.

fixed your post

whatsmynameagain
04-02-2010, 09:10 AM
fixed your post

this is a serious question, do you have down syndrome?
Posted via Mobile Device

banyon
04-02-2010, 09:12 AM
Unemployment stayed t 9.7% and actually went up if you take it to the 3 decimal place. Underemployment climbed to 20.9%

While the numbers are better we are not anywhere near the level we need to be. And a bunch of the number that look good now will drop off after May.

Where did you get that underemployment number. s/b 16.8%.

petegz28
04-02-2010, 09:16 AM
Who is saying its where it needs to be? Far from it but IMHO if people think we are ever returing to 3-4% unemployment #'s they are mistaken.

Pete, you see to follow this real close, you think we will see 3% unemployment again?

Doubtful. But if we don't get back down to a 6%-7% level we are going to be in bad shape.

petegz28
04-02-2010, 09:18 AM
http://sas-origin.onstreammedia.com/origin/gallupinc/GallupSpaces/Production/Cms/POLL/vywysin9wke7k-scgw0fwg.gifWhere did you get that underemployment number. s/b 16.8%.

Underemployment Rises to 20.3% in March
http://www.gallup.com/poll/127091/Underemployment-Rises-March.aspx


I was wrong. It was not 20.9, it was 20.3

banyon
04-02-2010, 09:20 AM
http://sas-origin.onstreammedia.com/origin/gallupinc/GallupSpaces/Production/Cms/POLL/vywysin9wke7k-scgw0fwg.gif

Underemployment Rises to 20.3% in March
http://www.gallup.com/poll/127091/Underemployment-Rises-March.aspx


I was wrong. It was not 20.9, it was 20.3

Uh, Gallup wasn't the one with the release today.

http://www.wkowtv.com/Global/story.asp?S=12246739

mlyonsd
04-02-2010, 09:24 AM
Look at Fox's current home page. Not a word about the job numbers. But they got a big piece on the Apple I tablet.

It was there earlier. They've sinced moved it to their business page.

petegz28
04-02-2010, 09:28 AM
Uh, Gallup wasn't the one with the release today.

http://www.wkowtv.com/Global/story.asp?S=12246739

Big whoop! They released it yesterday.

BigRedChief
04-02-2010, 09:41 AM
It was there earlier. They've sinced moved it to their business page.yep, fair and balanced. Every news site in America is featuring this news. But not Fox news. Instead we get front page articles about how Acorn is operating under different names.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/04/01/issa-releases-report-claiming-acorn-operates-different-names/

whatsmynameagain
04-02-2010, 09:44 AM
yep, fair and balanced. Every news site in America is featuring this news. But not Fox news. Instead we get front page articles about how Acorn is operating under different names.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/04/01/issa-releases-report-claiming-acorn-operates-different-names/

of course, they got this colored elected
Posted via Mobile Device

petegz28
04-02-2010, 09:46 AM
yep, fair and balanced. Every news site in America is featuring this news. But not Fox news. Instead we get front page articles about how Acorn is operating under different names.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/04/01/issa-releases-report-claiming-acorn-operates-different-names/

The stock market is closed today. Therefore it will not draw the attention as a story it might otherwise.

BigRedChief
04-02-2010, 09:47 AM
of course, they got this colored elected
Posted via Mobile Device
dude, whats with the "race" thing? None of this discussion in here has anything to do with race.

Saul Good
04-02-2010, 09:47 AM
yep, fair and balanced. Every news site in America is featuring this news. But not Fox news. Instead we get front page articles about how Acorn is operating under different names.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/04/01/issa-releases-report-claiming-acorn-operates-different-names/

It's not news. Nothing has changed in the slightest. There are a bunch of new government jobs that the rest of us are paying for. 10% are completely unemployed. Another 10-11% are underemployed. It's been a disaster for 3 years, and it's going to continue to be a disaster for the foreseeable future.

Saul Good
04-02-2010, 09:48 AM
dude, whats with the "race" thing? None of this discussion in here has anything to do with race.

Have you ever seen him make an intelligent post? You'd be better off scouring max sleeper's posts for intelligent thought.

whatsmynameagain
04-02-2010, 09:59 AM
dude, whats with the "race" thing? None of this discussion in here has anything to do with race.

we all know what it is. it doesnt matter what this pres does some will never give him any credit for anything unless its negative. obama could shit gold bricks and repubs would complain they werent big enough. anything to delegitimize him is the only things they accept. it seems they have been the most disillusioned by the messiah in thinking he could make everything right with the flick of a switch. before opening the thread i knew there would be nothing but complaints in the face of getting some positive news. these people want nothing more than failure. its their hope and change, hope obama fails so we can change leadership. in hoping he fails they are hoping for a nonrecovery, real patriots i tell ya.
Posted via Mobile Device

petegz28
04-02-2010, 10:04 AM
we all know what it is. it doesnt matter what this pres does some will never give him any credit for anything unless its negative. obama could shit gold bricks and repubs would complain they werent big enough. anything to delegitimize him is the only things they accept. it seems they have been the most disillusioned by the messiah in thinking he could make everything right with the flick of a switch. before opening the thread i knew there would be nothing but complaints in the face of getting some positive news. these people want nothing more than failure. its their hope and change, hope obama fails so we can change leadership. in hoping he fails they are hoping for a nonrecovery, real patriots i tell ya.
Posted via Mobile Device

You mean people are going to treat Obama the same way Bush was treated by the Left? WOW!

BigRedChief
04-02-2010, 10:09 AM
It's not news. Nothing has changed in the slightest. There are a bunch of new government jobs that the rest of us are paying for. 10% are completely unemployed. Another 10-11% are underemployed. It's been a disaster for 3 years, and it's going to continue to be a disaster for the foreseeable future.ROFL Glad you think 129K new jobs created by private enterprise is nothing. When Bush was losing 500K jobs a month under his watch, I guess that was nothing also? When Bush just about drove our economy off a cliff into another depression that wasn't news either?

you just made a shining example of whatsmynameagain's point for him.:shake:

mlyonsd
04-02-2010, 10:11 AM
yep, fair and balanced. Every news site in America is featuring this news. But not Fox news. Instead we get front page articles about how Acorn is operating under different names.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/04/01/issa-releases-report-claiming-acorn-operates-different-names/

LOL, should there be a front page story every day the unemployment rate stays the same?

I totally understand what you're doing. You can try and give the impression things are turning around. Free country. You better step it up, elections are about 7 months away.

But to a realist, expectations are much higher when you've borrowed a trillion dollars just to throw into the economy. Not only had you better get unemployment back close to where it was, but the money should be used to create long term jobs. I don't see that happening at all. You should make it clear if/when the money gets repaid so we can either prove or dispell the myth we'll need to throw a trillion dollars of borrowed money into the economy every time we have a recession.

The economy was always going to turn around. The only way your expectations are realistic is if we had never done the stimulus. But since we did I intend on pointing out at every chance how foolish it was.

mlyonsd
04-02-2010, 10:13 AM
ROFL Glad you think 129K new jobs created by private enterprise is nothing. When Bush was losing 500K jobs a month under his watch, I guess that was nothing also? When Bush just about drove our economy off a cliff into another depression that wasn't news either?

you just made a shining example of whatsmynameagain's point for him.:shake:

Wow.

So the answer is to borrow money a trillion at a time to create more bubbles? You and Obama are geniouses.

BigRedChief
04-02-2010, 10:17 AM
LOL, should there be a front page story every day the unemployment rate stays the same?

I totally understand what you're doing. You can try and give the impression things are turning around. Free country. You better step it up, elections are about 7 months away.

But to a realist, expectations are much higher when you've borrowed a trillion dollars just to throw into the economy. Not only had you better get unemployment back close to where it was, but the money should be used to create long term jobs. I don't see that happening at all. You should make it clear if/when the money gets repaid so we can either prove or dispell the myth we'll need to throw a trillion dollars of borrowed money into the economy every time we have a recession.

The economy was always going to turn around. The only way your expectations are realistic is if we had never done the stimulus. But since we did I intend on pointing out at every chance how foolish it was.In novemeber if its not clear to all that the economy is turning around it will be worse for the dems. They are already going to lose seats as part of the normal incumbenant process of mid-term elections. It just a matter of how much.

But, if the economy fully turns around by 2014, the Republicans have no chance against Obama. We recently had a President cheat on his wife in the oval office, lie to a grand jury and the American people and because the economy was good, he got to keep his job. Thats just the way American politics works for Presidents. If the economy is in the tiolet you are screwed no matter what else you do or did.

BigRedChief
04-02-2010, 10:18 AM
Wow.

So the answer is to borrow money a trillion at a time to create more bubbles? You and Obama are geniouses.Please point out in my post where I said borrowing a trillion $ was a good thing?

mlyonsd
04-02-2010, 10:40 AM
Please point out in my post where I said borrowing a trillion $ was a good thing?

If you can honestly say you were against the stimulus when it was being debated here I stand corrected.

petegz28
04-02-2010, 10:41 AM
Please point out in my post where I said borrowing a trillion $ was a good thing?

When you supoprted the $1 tril health care bill???

BigRedChief
04-02-2010, 10:50 AM
If you can honestly say you were against the stimulus when it was being debated here I stand corrected.okay, I'm clear now on what you are talking about and yes, I was in favor of that bill because most economists said it had to happen or else we are looking at a depression.

Were you in favor of Bush borrowing and spending trillions?

banyon
04-02-2010, 10:59 AM
Big whoop! They released it yesterday.

What do you think is more accurate? A random phone survey, or actual data from employers?

whatsmynameagain
04-02-2010, 11:00 AM
okay, I'm clear now on what you are talking about and yes, I was in favor of that bill because most economists said it had to happen or else we are looking at a depression.

Were you in favor of Bush borrowing and spending trillions?

of course he was, along with the tax cuts for the wealthy that stripped over a trillion in revenues. of course they wont admit it now and why would they. they are able to have it both ways. kind of like being against abortion and welfare. double talking jive turkeys
Posted via Mobile Device

whatsmynameagain
04-02-2010, 11:05 AM
What do you think is more accurate? A random phone survey, or actual data from employers?

its really worthless to acknowledge pete. he lives in his own fairy tale land. he constantly posts things only to have them proven wrong and once said post is proven wrong he starts his next doomsday post. the sky is always cloudy where pete lives and everyone is out to get him. i cant think of an individual ive encountered thats as pathetic as pete. im guessing he sucked really bad at kickball and thats where all of this began....
Posted via Mobile Device

petegz28
04-02-2010, 11:07 AM
What do you think is more accurate? A random phone survey, or actual data from employers?

I'd say it probably lies somewhere inbetween.

Saul Good
04-02-2010, 11:15 AM
they are able to have it both ways. kind of like being against abortion and welfare. double talking jive turkeys
Posted via Mobile Device

There it is. Another liberal for abortion because he doesn't want to pay for poor brown babies. The examples of liberals viewing minorities as pets keep on rolling.

Help control the negro population. Have your pets spayed or neutered.

banyon
04-02-2010, 11:16 AM
I'd say it probably lies somewhere inbetween.

Why would it?

Saul Good
04-02-2010, 11:17 AM
What do you think is more accurate? A random phone survey, or actual data from employers?

I'll trust gallup over the Labor Department when it comes to conducting a survey any day.

banyon
04-02-2010, 11:21 AM
I'll trust gallup over the Labor Department when it comes to conducting a survey any day.

Why? does it matter how the surveys are conducted?

mlyonsd
04-02-2010, 11:28 AM
okay, I'm clear now on what you are talking about and yes, I was in favor of that bill because most economists said it had to happen or else we are looking at a depression.

Were you in favor of Bush borrowing and spending trillions?

Ah yes, I was wondering when the conversation would evolve back to Bush.

I have always been vocal here stating how Bush was fiscally irresponsible.

But to carry on your line of thinking....since most intelligience agencies thought Saddam had WMD and was trying to obtain more, invading was a good idea, right? So as far as the money for the war goes it was a good idea at the time?

whatsmynameagain
04-02-2010, 11:30 AM
There it is. Another liberal for abortion because he doesn't want to pay for poor brown babies. The examples of liberals viewing minorities as pets keep on rolling.

Help control the negro population. Have your pets spayed or neutered.

im for abortion because it does no good to have a child raised by someone who doesnt want to raise it. all that does is continues the cycle. i know thats hard to understand for a low double digit iq retard like you but maybe your mommy or daddy can explain it to you.
Posted via Mobile Device

whatsmynameagain
04-02-2010, 11:36 AM
Ah yes, I was wondering when the conversation would evolve back to Bush.

I have always been vocal here stating how Bush was fiscally irresponsible.

But to carry on your line of thinking....since most intelligience agencies thought Saddam had WMD and was trying to obtain more, invading was a good idea, right? So as far as the money for the war goes it was a good idea at the time?

their top piece of intelligence was fabricated with an iraqi exile that was bitter. their was no intelligence. CURVEBALL
Posted via Mobile Device

petegz28
04-02-2010, 11:37 AM
Why? does it matter how the surveys are conducted?

Hang on, you just asked me why to take Gallub of the LD and now you say it doesn't matter how the surveys are conducted???

Nice backtrack.

petegz28
04-02-2010, 11:38 AM
im for abortion because it does no good to have a child raised by someone who doesnt want to raise it. all that does is continues the cycle. i know thats hard to understand for a low double digit iq retard like you but maybe your mommy or daddy can explain it to you.
Posted via Mobile Device

Ever heard of adoption, dickhead?

dirk digler
04-02-2010, 11:41 AM
If you can honestly say you were against the stimulus when it was being debated here I stand corrected.

I know you weren't asking me but I have always been for the stimulus and still am.

I have seen more road construction in the last 6-8 months then I have ever seen in the last 10 years or so. I think that is a good thing because IMO alot of people really don't understand how shitty our infrastructure is in this country.

petegz28
04-02-2010, 11:44 AM
I know you weren't asking me but I have always been for the stimulus and still am.

I have seen more road construction in the last 6-8 months then I have ever seen in the last 10 years or so. I think that is a good thing because IMO alot of people really don't understand how shitty our infrastructure is in this country.

Se we needed a special stimulus to fix the roads??? Bullshit. We need to spend the money more wisely. Not print more and hand off the debt to the kids.

dirk digler
04-02-2010, 11:50 AM
Se we needed a special stimulus to fix the roads??? Bullshit. We need to spend the money more wisely. Not print more and hand off the debt to the kids.

I posted something probably about a year ago on this very subject where someone with inside knowledge of our infrastructure stated that if we really were serious about fixing it would cost around $2 trillion dollars.

Of course people would bitch and moan about it and then as usual it gets kicked the down road at least until another bridge collapses and kills a bunch of people then they would want to pay for it.

whatsmynameagain
04-02-2010, 11:53 AM
Ever heard of adoption, dickhead?

no, never.

not a viable solution, not even close.
Posted via Mobile Device

petegz28
04-02-2010, 11:58 AM
I posted something probably about a year ago on this very subject where someone with inside knowledge of our infrastructure stated that if we really were serious about fixing it would cost around $2 trillion dollars.

Of course people would bitch and moan about it and then as usual it gets kicked the down road at least until another bridge collapses and kills a bunch of people then they would want to pay for it.

I don't mind spending the $2 tril. It's a matter of where the money comes from.

dirk digler
04-02-2010, 12:19 PM
I don't mind spending the $2 tril. It's a matter of where the money comes from.

I don't know about that pete. Alot of you guys bitched and moaned about the health care bill hell even about a relatively small amount like the student loan program.

stevieray
04-02-2010, 12:33 PM
Commerical real estate? Welll then Bush really screwed the pooch in that field.

bushbushbushbushbushbushbushbush

I know you think gIvernment is supposed to run the private sector.

:shake:

BigRedChief
04-02-2010, 01:04 PM
Ah yes, I was wondering when the conversation would evolve back to Bush.

I have always been vocal here stating how Bush was fiscally irresponsible.

But to carry on your line of thinking....since most intelligience agencies thought Saddam had WMD and was trying to obtain more, invading was a good idea, right? So as far as the money for the war goes it was a good idea at the time?I disagree and history says your FOS too.:rolleyes:

But, not going to swerve this thread because you and patteeau want to re-write history.

mlyonsd
04-02-2010, 01:09 PM
I disagree and history says your FOS too.:rolleyes:

But, not going to swerve this thread because you and patteeau want to re-write history.

What? It was using your logic.

petegz28
04-02-2010, 01:23 PM
I don't know about that pete. Alot of you guys bitched and moaned about the health care bill hell even about a relatively small amount like the student loan program.

You can't compare spending money on fixing highways to taking over 1/6 of the economy.

BigRedChief
04-02-2010, 01:27 PM
You can't compare spending money on fixing highways to taking over 1/6 of the economy.Noone took over a damn thing. Quit being so melodramatic. No one is killing grandma via death panels either.

Private insurance is still in charge. They just have some new rules to follow. Damn good rules those greedy bastages refused to follow before we forced them.

You don't think they were good rules? just try running a candidate against them.

Hydrae
04-02-2010, 01:42 PM
I know you weren't asking me but I have always been for the stimulus and still am.

I have seen more road construction in the last 6-8 months then I have ever seen in the last 10 years or so. I think that is a good thing because IMO alot of people really don't understand how shitty our infrastructure is in this country.

Why should the majority of the infrastructure be paid from the federal level? I understand that the interstate system needs to be handled that way but why should my tax dollars from Texas go to fix a state highway in Missouri? Should that not be up to the state?

petegz28
04-02-2010, 01:42 PM
Noone took over a damn thing. Quit being so melodramatic. No one is killing grandma via death panels either.

Private insurance is still in charge. They just have some new rules to follow. Damn good rules those greedy bastages refused to follow before we forced them.

You don't think they were good rules? just try running a candidate against them.

Isn't it about time you gave OBama his daily suck job?

Now we know you were totally full of shit all those times you said you were against the bill.

LMAO.....go play with yourself

BigRedChief
04-02-2010, 01:46 PM
Isn't it about time you gave OBama his daily suck job?

Now we now you were totally full of shit all those times you said you were against the bill.

LMAO.....go play with yourselfyeah more marginlizing, go suck Obamas cock...lame

I was against a new government run health care program making decisions for us. Thats not what happened. And the government didn't take over 1/6th of the economy. Lighten up Francis.

dirk digler
04-02-2010, 01:51 PM
Why should the majority of the infrastructure be paid from the federal level? I understand that the interstate system needs to be handled that way but why should my tax dollars from Texas go to fix a state highway in Missouri? Should that not be up to the state?

In most cases probably yes but the states are broke too.

petegz28
04-02-2010, 01:58 PM
yeah more marginlizing, go suck Obamas cock...lame

I was against a new government run health care program making decisions for us. Thats not what happened. And the government didn't take over 1/6th of the economy. Lighten up Francis.

No, them mandating you buy health care isn't making a decision for you.


Dumbass!

Hydrae
04-02-2010, 01:58 PM
In most cases probably yes but the states are broke too.

Could that be because all the available funds (what the taxpayers can bear) is being eaten up by the feds? It seems like all of the moves in the last year have done nothing but move more and more up to the federal level. I can not begin to express how much that little fact pisses me off.

petegz28
04-02-2010, 02:03 PM
Might I add, BRC, not only are they going to decide for you that you will buy health insurance, they are also going to decide for you and the people...

1. That companies MUST provide insurance, even to part time help
2. What is accpetable insurance
3. How much you will be limited too on out of pocket expenses
4. Where you will buy your insurance from should you not have company provided insurance

I am sure I am forgetting some things as well

BigRedChief
04-02-2010, 02:04 PM
No, them mandating you buy health care isn't making a decision for you.


Dumbass!You realize by telling me to go suck Obamas cock and calling me names you are being owned, correct? You just don't care huh? I'm done with you for today. You bore me.

petegz28
04-02-2010, 02:11 PM
You realize by telling me to go suck Obamas cock and calling me names you are being owned, correct? You just don't care huh? I'm done with you for today. You bore me.

If you say so, John Kerry.

Chief Henry
04-02-2010, 03:40 PM
Just saw a new CBS poll...Obama is dropping like a brick in several areas...

In April of 2009 his approval rating was 68% - now its 44 %.

On the ECONOMY, his approval rating in APril 2009 was 61% - now its 42 %.

On Health Care, his approval is just 34 % and his disapproval is 55%.

Over all, 84% say the economy is in bad condition.


Don't shoot the messenger.

dirk digler
04-02-2010, 03:44 PM
Could that be because all the available funds (what the taxpayers can bear) is being eaten up by the feds? It seems like all of the moves in the last year have done nothing but move more and more up to the federal level. I can not begin to express how much that little fact pisses me off.

I don't know how it is in Texas but I pay state taxes and MO is broke like most other states.

banyon
04-02-2010, 04:39 PM
Hang on, you just asked me why to take Gallub of the LD and now you say it doesn't matter how the surveys are conducted???

Nice backtrack.

No, I think it does matter, that was the point of asking the question.

whatsmynameagain
04-02-2010, 05:32 PM
im going to go ahead and end this thread right now

I HOPE WE LOSE 3 MILLION JOBS NEXT MONTH

now im going to go put a "the south will rise again" bumper sticker on my pontiac grand prix
Posted via Mobile Device

mlyonsd
04-02-2010, 07:38 PM
But, not going to swerve this thread because you and patteeau want to re-write history.

FTR I wasn't the one that brought up Bush, and I'm not the one running away from the discussion.

stevieray
04-03-2010, 11:11 AM
Noone took over a damn thing. Quit being so melodramatic. No one is killing grandma via death panels either.

Private insurance is still in charge. They just have some new rules to follow. Damn good rules those greedy bastages refused to follow before we forced them.

You don't think they were good rules? just try running a candidate against them.

you're clueless.

"we forced them" sure sounds like a republic to me.


in two years, cuts include..

Dialysis (medicare)
Hospice
Home care(medicare)
Medicare reimbursements to Hospitals and Nursing Homes


page 148-149...
dictates to doctors who they can treat.
violates doctor/patient privacy
clause that says a decison made by a bureaucrat can not be overturned.

know why Obama propped up that the AMA supported this? because it only represents 17% of doctors.

so spare us your melodrama about death panels being non existent.

The Mad Crapper
04-03-2010, 11:16 AM
yeah more marginlizing, go suck Obamas cock...lame

Who's marginalizing? GO. SUCK. HIS. COCK.

The Mad Crapper
04-03-2010, 11:20 AM
you're clueless.

"we forced them" sure sounds like a republic to me.


in two years, cuts include..

Dialysis (medicare)
Hospice
Home care(medicare)
Medicare reimbursements to Hospitals and Nursing Homes


page 148-149...
dictates to doctors who they can treat.
violates doctor/patient privacy
clause that says a decison made by a beuracrat can not be overturned.

know why Obama propped up that the AMA supported this? because it only represents 17% of doctors.

so spare us your melodrama about death panels being non existent.

I remember when that POS John Lewis said that the Repubs were "coming for the sick and the poor" and now he's using race to smear the Tea party crowd to cover up for his own disgusting, cowardly behavior.

The guy has a long history of this...

http://newsbusters.org/node/25153/print

But the cruel irony of moonbattery is, after years of using scare tactics on seniors, they are now throwing them all under the bus so they can get a new bunch of freeloaders on medicaid to boost their constituency.

And Moonbats love it.

BigRedChief
04-05-2010, 12:14 PM
http://money.cnn.com/2010/04/05/markets/markets_newyork/index.htm?hpt=T2

Dow edges closer to 11,000

By Alexandra Twin, senior writerApril 5, 2010: 12:24 PM ET


NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) -- Stocks rallied Monday, with the Dow edging closer to 11,000, as investors returning from a long weekend welcomed last week's jobs report, the morning's strong housing market report and the launch of Apple's iPad computer.
Investors also kept an eye on the ten-year note yield, which surged to 4% as investors dumped treasuries in favor of riskier assets.
<!-- REAP --><!--startclickprintexclude-->
Economy: The Pending home sales (http://money.cnn.com/2010/04/05/news/economy/pending_home_sales/index.htm?postversion=2010040512) index posted a surprise jump in February, rising 8.2% to 97.6 from a revised 90.2 in January. Economists expected the report from the National Association of Realtors to have declined by 1%, according to Briefing.com forecasts.
A separate report showed growth in the services sector of the economy. The Institute for Supply Management's (ISM) services sector index rose to 55.4 in March from 50 in February, versus forecasts for a rise to 53.6. Any reading over 50 indicates expansion in the sector.

Stinger
04-05-2010, 12:26 PM
FWIW

No Jobs Recovery
by Robert Reich

Friday, April 2, 2010

The US economy added 162,000 jobs in March. Great news until you look more closely. In March, the federal government began hiring census takers big time. These are six-month temp jobs, and they tell us nothing about underlying trends in the labor market. It’s hard to gauge precisely how many were hired — probably between 100,000 and 140,000, although some estimates put the hiring as low as 48,000. Almost a million census workers will need to be hired over the next few months. Subtract these, and today’s job numbers are good but nothing to write home about.

There are some positive signs. Manufacturing payrolls expanded a bit, heath care employers added 27,000 jobs, and about 40,000 private-sector temp jobs were added. But payrolls continue to be slashed in financial services and the information industry.

Two big things to bear in mind:

First, government spending on last year’s giant stimulus is still near its peak, and the Fed continues to hold down interest rates. Without these props, it’s far from clear we’d have any job growth at all.

Second, since the start of the Great Recession, the economy has lost 8.4 million jobs and failed to create another 2.7 million needed just to keep up with population growth. That means we’re more than 11 million in the hole right now. And that hole keeps deepening every month we fail to add at least 150,000 new jobs, again reflecting population growth.

A census-taking job is better than no job, but it’s no substitute for the real thing.

Bottom line: This is no jobs recovery.

http://robertreich.org/post/491319675/no-jobs-recovery

BigRedChief
04-05-2010, 12:30 PM
FWIW

No Jobs Recovery
by Robert Reich

Friday, April 2, 2010

The US economy added 162,000 jobs in March. Great news until you look more closely. In March, the federal government began hiring census takers big time. These are six-month temp jobs, and they tell us nothing about underlying trends in the labor market. It’s hard to gauge precisely how many were hired — probably between 100,000 and 140,000, although some estimates put the hiring as low as 48,000. Almost a million census workers will need to be hired over the next few months. Subtract these, and today’s job numbers are good but nothing to write home about.

There are some positive signs. Manufacturing payrolls expanded a bit, heath care employers added 27,000 jobs, and about 40,000 private-sector temp jobs were added. But payrolls continue to be slashed in financial services and the information industry.

Two big things to bear in mind:

First, government spending on last year’s giant stimulus is still near its peak, and the Fed continues to hold down interest rates. Without these props, it’s far from clear we’d have any job growth at all.

Second, since the start of the Great Recession, the economy has lost 8.4 million jobs and failed to create another 2.7 million needed just to keep up with population growth. That means we’re more than 11 million in the hole right now. And that hole keeps deepening every month we fail to add at least 150,000 new jobs, again reflecting population growth.

A census-taking job is better than no job, but it’s no substitute for the real thing.

Bottom line: This is no jobs recovery.

http://robertreich.org/post/491319675/no-jobs-recovery
You got to stop hemmoraging jobs before you can gain jobs. No one is going to call this economy fully recovered until the jobs come back. but, as I've said many times....We will never see unemployment under 7% again.

BigRedChief
04-05-2010, 01:20 PM
http://money.cnn.com/2010/04/05/markets/markets_newyork/index.htm?hpt=T2
Economy: The Pending home sales (http://money.cnn.com/2010/04/05/news/economy/pending_home_sales/index.htm?postversion=2010040512) index posted a surprise jump in February, rising 8.2% to 97.6 from a revised 90.2 in January. Economists expected the report from the National Association of Realtors to have declined by 1%, according to Briefing.com forecasts.
A separate report showed growth in the services sector of the economy. The Institute for Supply Management's (ISM) services sector index rose to 55.4 in March from 50 in February, versus forecasts for a rise to 53.6. Any reading over 50 indicates expansion in the sector.
More details on the housing #'s.

Another green shoot: More contracts signed to purchase homes, with the Midwest leading the way


<!-- END tabs --><!-- begin content -->Bloomberg News
More Americans unexpectedly signed contracts in February to buy previously owned homes, signaling government efforts to support the market will start to pay off.
Activity was particularly strong in the Midwest.

The index of purchase agreements, or pending home sales, rose 8.2 percent, the second-biggest gain on record and the largest since October 2001, after a revised 7.8 percent drop in January, the National Association of Realtors announced today in Washington.

Buyers may be vying to take advantage of an Obama administration tax credit that requires a contract be signed by the end of April, indicating a rebound in sales will soon emerge. Sustained gains in employment would ensure sales continue to rise even after the government incentive expires, raising the odds the economic recovery is maintained.

“There’s an underlying trend of improvement in housing related to improving affordability and consumer confidence,” Richard DeKaser, chief economist at Woodley Park Research in Washington, who anticipated the index would rise, said before the report.

Economists forecast the gauge would be unchanged after a previously reported 7.6 percent drop for January, according to the median of 33 projections in a Bloomberg News survey. Estimates ranged from a decline of 3.5 percent to an increase of 5.5 percent.

The increase “may signal the early stages of a second surge of home sales,” Lawrence Yun, the group’s chief economist, said in a statement. “We need a second surge to meaningfully draw down inventory and definitively stabilize home values.”

The Realtors’ report showed pending sales climbed in three of four regions, led by a 22 percent jump in the Midwest. Purchases increased 9.2 percent in the South and 9 percent in the Northeast. They fell 4.8 percent in the West.

Pending sales are considered a leading indicator because they track contract signings. The Realtors’ existing-home sales report tallies closings, which typically occur a month or two later. The pending sales data go back to January 2001 and the group began publishing the index in March 2005.

petegz28
04-05-2010, 01:22 PM
More details on the housing #'s.

Another green shoot: More contracts signed to purchase homes, with the Midwest leading the way


<!-- END tabs --><!-- begin content -->Bloomberg News
More Americans unexpectedly signed contracts in February to buy previously owned homes, signaling government efforts to support the market will start to pay off.
Activity was particularly strong in the Midwest.

The index of purchase agreements, or pending home sales, rose 8.2 percent, the second-biggest gain on record and the largest since October 2001, after a revised 7.8 percent drop in January, the National Association of Realtors announced today in Washington.

Buyers may be vying to take advantage of an Obama administration tax credit that requires a contract be signed by the end of April, indicating a rebound in sales will soon emerge. Sustained gains in employment would ensure sales continue to rise even after the government incentive expires, raising the odds the economic recovery is maintained.

“There’s an underlying trend of improvement in housing related to improving affordability and consumer confidence,” Richard DeKaser, chief economist at Woodley Park Research in Washington, who anticipated the index would rise, said before the report.

Economists forecast the gauge would be unchanged after a previously reported 7.6 percent drop for January, according to the median of 33 projections in a Bloomberg News survey. Estimates ranged from a decline of 3.5 percent to an increase of 5.5 percent.

The increase “may signal the early stages of a second surge of home sales,” Lawrence Yun, the group’s chief economist, said in a statement. “We need a second surge to meaningfully draw down inventory and definitively stabilize home values.”

The Realtors’ report showed pending sales climbed in three of four regions, led by a 22 percent jump in the Midwest. Purchases increased 9.2 percent in the South and 9 percent in the Northeast. They fell 4.8 percent in the West.

Pending sales are considered a leading indicator because they track contract signings. The Realtors’ existing-home sales report tallies closings, which typically occur a month or two later. The pending sales data go back to January 2001 and the group began publishing the index in March 2005.

Interest rates are on the rise. That should spur real estate buying. People have been waiting for the bottom. Now they will start jumping in before rates take off.

BigRedChief
04-05-2010, 01:28 PM
Interest rates are on the rise. That should spur real estate buying. People have been waiting for the bottom. Now they will start jumping in before rates take off.okay pete you seem to know this economy "stuff". You have to raise interest rates during a recovery to avoid inflation, correct? But, raising interest rates during a recovery is risky business and if done wrong could kill recovery, correct?

So whats the template to avoid inflation and not kill a recovery?

petegz28
04-05-2010, 03:18 PM
okay pete you seem to know this economy "stuff". You have to raise interest rates during a recovery to avoid inflation, correct? But, raising interest rates during a recovery is risky business and if done wrong could kill recovery, correct?

So whats the template to avoid inflation and not kill a recovery?

It comes down to how much rates go up. The problem is the Fed printed so much fucking money they set us up for inflation big time.

KC Dan
04-08-2010, 10:06 AM
BRC, Your'e slacking! Where's today's article about New Jobless Claims rising instead of falling as predicted? Or, does it NOT fit your narrative....

Brainiac
04-08-2010, 10:24 AM
You got to stop hemmoraging jobs before you can gain jobs. No one is going to call this economy fully recovered until the jobs come back. but, as I've said many times....We will never see unemployment under 7% again.
Why is that? You don't really think the Obamunists will be in power forever, do you?

Brainiac
04-08-2010, 10:26 AM
okay pete you seem to know this economy "stuff". You have to raise interest rates during a recovery to avoid inflation, correct? But, raising interest rates during a recovery is risky business and if done wrong could kill recovery, correct?

So whats the template to avoid inflation and not kill a recovery?
That's easy. You lower taxes to stimulate the economy. You raise interest rates as needed to keep the economy from overheating and inflating the currency.

It's called Reaganomics.

mlyonsd
04-08-2010, 10:27 AM
BRC, Your'e slacking! Where's today's article about New Jobless Claims rising instead of falling as predicted? Or, does it NOT fit your narrative....

Local Morrel plant is closing Friday. 1900 more jobs that will show up next month.

BigRedChief
04-08-2010, 10:44 AM
BRC, Your'e slacking! Where's today's article about New Jobless Claims rising instead of falling as predicted? Or, does it NOT fit your narrative....if its not posted on Obama.com I don't see it.

Chief Henry
04-08-2010, 11:07 AM
if its not posted on iloveandthinkhesthebomb Obama.com I don't see it.

fyp

The Mad Crapper
04-08-2010, 12:14 PM
I like the way BRC keeps using the DOW as an indicator that things are getting better. Can you buy food with it? Are the 40+ points on the day going to pay your rent?

People are hurting and HURTING BAD and that imbecile dumbo in the white house exacerbates it with his policies and BRC and Banyon continue to toss his salad and call people raythithts.

Dopey moonbats.

KC native
04-08-2010, 03:44 PM
That's easy. You lower taxes to stimulate the economy. You raise interest rates as needed to keep the economy from overheating and inflating the currency.

It's called Reaganomics.

So, what happened with Bush's "Reaganomics'?

The Mad Crapper
04-08-2010, 03:45 PM
So, what happened with Bush's "Reaganomics'?

I give up. What happened?

Calcountry
04-08-2010, 10:29 PM
Placeholder thread to have one single place to copy and paste recent released figures/news stories and a place to discuss those facts and derive meaning from said facts.:)discuss.

Calcountry
04-08-2010, 10:31 PM
So, what happened with Bush's "Reaganomics'?You mean "compassionate conservatism"? It sucked ass. Not only that, it led to this absolute DISASTER that is taking place right now.

petegz28
04-08-2010, 10:34 PM
You mean "compassionate conservatism"? It sucked ass. Not only that, it led to this absolute DISASTER that is taking place right now.

What Bush and the Repubs did was not good. The Dems have made it worse.

BigRedChief
04-09-2010, 10:47 AM
Dow flirts with 11,000 on recovery optimism
Major indexes are off highs after Fitch Ratings cuts view on Greece debt
The Associated Press
updated 10:12 a.m. CT, Fri., April 9, 2010

<SCRIPT language=javascript> function UpdateTimeStamp(pdt) { var n = document.getElementById("udtD"); if(pdt != '' && n && window.DateTime) { var dt = new DateTime(); pdt = dt.T2D(pdt); if(dt.GetTZ(pdt)) {n.innerHTML = dt.D2S(pdt,(('false'.toLowerCase()=='false')?false:true));} } } UpdateTimeStamp('634064227487270000');</SCRIPT>
NEW YORK - Fresh signs Friday that the economy continues its slow, steady recovery helped push stocks slightly higher.

Major indexes pulled back from their morning highs after Fitch Ratings cut its view on Greece's debt. Stocks have been fluctuating in recent days on fresh concerns about the European nation's ability to repay debt.
Earlier in the morning, stocks got a boost after reassuring statements from Greece's finance minister and the head of the European Central Bank. Major European indexes are higher, while the dollar fell against the euro.

Stocks are getting a boost from rising commodity prices. Commodities mostly climbed on hopes demand will jump as the economy continues to improve. That has helped energy and materials companies. Chevron Corp. and ExxonMobil Corp. both rose.

The Dow Jones industrial average is again creeping toward the 11,000 level. It broke a two-day losing streak Thursday after retailers reported strong March sales. J.C. Penney shares jumped after an analyst upgraded his view on the stock. The retailer raised its first-quarter outlook Thursday after reporting better-than-expected sales.

A report on wholesale inventories provided the latest positive sign on the economy. The Commerce Department said inventories rose 0.6 percent in February, better than the 0.4 percent forecast by economists polled by Thomson Reuters.

Sales at wholesalers also rose faster than expected, gaining 0.8 percent. It was the 11th straight month of rising sales. Economists had forecast a 0.5 percent rise.

Consistently rising inventories and sales at the wholesale level mean that manufacturers are getting steady orders that should allow them to hire more workers. It also means retailers are ramping up orders as consumers return to stores after curtailing their spending during the recession.
In late morning trading, the Dow rose 34.54, or 0.3 percent, to 10,961.61. The Standard & Poor's 500 index rose 1.74, or 0.3 percent, to 1,190.06, while the Nasdaq composite index rose 5.63, or 0.2 percent, to 2,442.44.
The Dow has flirted with the 11,000 level throughout the week, coming within about a dozen points of the mark on both Monday and Tuesday. It came within 24 points Friday. If the Dow hits 11,000, it would be the first time it reached that level in 18 months.

However, it hasn't been able to hit that level as stocks have remained relatively flat throughout the week.

"Considering how fare we've come, a sideways week was appropriate," said Maury Fertig, chief investment officer at Relative Value Partners in Northbrook, Ill.

If Dow rises Friday, it would give the index its sixth straight weekly gain for the first time since a stretch in March and April last year just after market bottomed. The Dow started the day at exactly the same level it closed last week. Analysts have said that the markets' steady climb in recent weeks made it due for a pause. \


About three stocks rose for every two that fell on the New York Stock Exchange, where volume came to 281.1 million shares, compared with 251.7 million traded at the same point Thursday.

Benchmark crude for May delivery pulled back from morning highs was is now down 10 cents at $85.29 a barrel on the New York Mercantile Exchange. It rose above $86 a barrel earlier in the day.

Chevron jumped $1.49 to $79.15, while ExxonMobil rose 89 cents to $68.75. J.C. Penney climbed 72 cents, or 2.3 percent, to $31.70.
Bond prices dipped as investors moved out of the safety of bonds and into stocks and commodities. The yield on the benchmark 10-year Treasury note, which moves opposite its price, rose to 3.92 percent from 3.89 percent late Thursday.

Solid demand throughout the week at Treasury auctions had sent yields lower in recent days, after the 10-year note yield rose above 4 percent on Monday for the first time since June.
The Russell 2000 index of smaller companies rose 0.73, or 0.1 percent, to 700.37.

Overseas, Britain's FTSE 100 gained 0.9 percent, Germany's DAX index rose 1.1 percent, and France's CAC-40 jumped 1.5 percent. Japan's Nikkei stock average rose 0.3 percent.



© 2010 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
<SCRIPT>var url=location.href;var i=url.indexOf('/did/') + 1;if(i==0){i=url.indexOf('/print/1/') + 1;}if(i==0){i=url.indexOf('&print=1');}if(i>0){url = url.substring(0,i);document.write('URL: '+url+' (http://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/'+url+')
');if (typeof FDCPUrl == 'function'){FDCPUrl();}else if(window.print){window.print()}else{alert('To print his page press Ctrl-P on your keyboard \nor choose print from your browser or device after clicking OK');}}</SCRIPT>URL: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/36312860/ns/business-stocks_and_economy/ (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/36312860/ns/business-stocks_and_economy/)

The Mad Crapper
04-09-2010, 10:49 AM
You mean "compassionate conservatism"? It sucked ass. Not only that, it led to this absolute DISASTER that is taking place right now.

Bush is a POS for creating another medicare entitlement, but the fact is if he didn't sign that drug bill, Kerry would have taken it and ran all the way to victory.

The Mad Crapper
04-09-2010, 10:50 AM
Dow flirts with 11,000 on recovery optimism


Wow thats good to know. Can I put gasoline in my car with that? Food on my table? Pay a mortgage or rent?

mlyonsd
04-09-2010, 11:05 AM
Wonder what the ecomony will do when gas hits $4 this summer.

The Mad Crapper
04-09-2010, 11:06 AM
Wonder what the ecomony will do when gas hits $4 this summer.

I can guarantee what won't happen---

The moonbats en masse won't be blaming Bushitler.

Chief Henry
04-09-2010, 11:16 AM
Sioux City Iowa is losing aout 1,300 jobs when a John Morrell plant closes.

The dems are on a roll since 2006.

BigRedChief
04-14-2010, 07:54 AM
U.S. retail sales surge in March
Consumers stepped up purchases of vehicles and a wide range of goods
BREAKING NEWS
Reuters
updated 7:35 a.m. CT, Wed., April 14, 2010

<SCRIPT language=javascript> function UpdateTimeStamp(pdt) { var n = document.getElementById("udtD"); if(pdt != '' && n && window.DateTime) { var dt = new DateTime(); pdt = dt.T2D(pdt); if(dt.GetTZ(pdt)) {n.innerHTML = dt.D2S(pdt,(('false'.toLowerCase()=='false')?false:true));} } } UpdateTimeStamp('634068453408930000');</SCRIPT>
WASHINGTON - Sales at U.S. retailers rose more strongly than expected in March as consumer stepped up purchases of vehicles and wide range of goods, government data showed on Wednesday, suggesting a broadening of the manufacturing-led economic recovery.

The Commerce Department said total retail sales jumped 1.6 percent, the largest increase since November, from an upwardly revised 0.5 percent rise in February. Sales in February were previously reported to have gained 0.3 percent.

Analysts polled by Reuters had forecast retail sales increasing 1.2 percent last month. Compared to February last year, sales were 7.6 percent higher.

Motor vehicle and parts purchases surged 6.7 percent last month, the biggest rise since October, after dropping 1.9 percent in February.
Consumers are defying high unemployment and tight access to credit to spend, offering hope that the recovery from the worst economic downturn in 70 years will continue when the lift from government stimulus and the swing in the inventory cycle ebbs.

Growing confidence in the recovery, particularly brightening job market prospects, is encouraging households to tap into the savings to fund purchases of goods, including luxury items.
Excluding motor vehicles and parts, retail sales rose 0.6 percent in March after rising 1.0 percent the prior month as a combination of an early Easter holiday and warm weather boosted receipts at clothing stores. Economists had expected a 0.5 percent gain.

Core retail sales, which exclude autos, gasoline and building materials, rose 0.5 percent after increasing 1.2 percent February. Core sales correspond most closely with the consumer spending component of the government's gross domestic product report.

Clothing and clothing accessories sales increased 2.3 percent, while building materials and garden equipment climbed 3.1 percent - the largest advance since November 2007. Receipts at sporting goods, hobby and book stores rose 1.0 percent in March. Sales at electronics and appliance stores, however, fell 1.3 percent and receipts at gasoline stations slipped 0.4 percent.


Copyright 2010 Reuters. Click for restrictions.
<SCRIPT>var url=location.href;var i=url.indexOf('/did/') + 1;if(i==0){i=url.indexOf('/print/1/') + 1;}if(i==0){i=url.indexOf('&print=1');}if(i>0){url = url.substring(0,i);document.write('URL: '+url+' (http://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/'+url+')
');if (typeof FDCPUrl == 'function'){FDCPUrl();}else if(window.print){window.print()}else{alert('To print his page press Ctrl-P on your keyboard \nor choose print from your browser or device after clicking OK');}}</SCRIPT>URL: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/36499241/ns/business-retail/ (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/36499241/ns/business-retail/)

BigRedChief
04-14-2010, 08:07 AM
Bernanke has bittersweet message on economy
Fed chief under more pressure than usual as he goes to Capitol Hill
By Jeannine Aversa
The Associated Press
updated 6:50 a.m. CT, Wed., April 14, 2010

<SCRIPT language=javascript> function UpdateTimeStamp(pdt) { var n = document.getElementById("udtD"); if(pdt != '' && n && window.DateTime) { var dt = new DateTime(); pdt = dt.T2D(pdt); if(dt.GetTZ(pdt)) {n.innerHTML = dt.D2S(pdt,(('false'.toLowerCase()=='false')?false:true));} } } UpdateTimeStamp('634068426475600000');</SCRIPT>
WASHINGTON - Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke goes to Capitol Hill on Wednesday with a bittersweet message: The economic recovery is taking hold but won't be strong enough to quickly drive down unemployment.

Bernanke's out-of-the box thinking during the 2008 financial crisis helped prevent the Great Recession from turning into the second Great Depression. Now, however, the Fed chief faces the delicate task of making sure the recovery lasts well after massive government stimulus fades later this year.

To foster the recovery, Bernanke and other Fed officials have repeatedly pledged to hold interest rates at record lows for an "extended period." The hope is that low rates will entice people and businesses to spend more, generating enough economic activity to help keep the recovery going.
But Bernanke is likely to warn again that the pace of the recovery will be sluggish because Americans still face formidable headwinds: high unemployment, stagnant wages, weak home values, rising foreclosures and hard-to-get credit.

The Fed chief will offer his latest assessment on the economy when he appears before Congress' Joint Economic Committee. He'll be under more pressure than usual. It's an election year for lawmakers, whose constituents — including individuals and small businesses — are anxious about their financial prospects.

The economy started growing again in the third quarter of last year, after a record four straight losing quarters. And, more recently, the economy started to finally create jobs — 162,000 of them in March, the most in three years. Nonetheless, the unemployment rate has been stuck at 9.7 percent for three straight months — close to its highest levels since the early 1980s.

Many private economists say it will take at least until the middle of this decade for the jobless rate to drop to a more normal 5.5 percent to 6 percent. Recoveries after financial crises tend to be more subdued as some credit problems linger.


With the worst over, though, the Fed has dismantled most of its special lending programs set up during the crisis. And, the Fed ended last month a $1.25 trillion mortgage-buying program that lowered mortgage rates and bolstered home sales.

At some point when the recovery is firmly entrenched, the Fed will need to start boosting rates to prevent any inflation problems.

The soonest the Federal Reserve will begin raising short-term interest rates is the fourth quarter, according to 34 of the 44 economists polled in a new AP Economy Survey that debuted on Monday.


Copyright 2010 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
<SCRIPT>var url=location.href;var i=url.indexOf('/did/') + 1;if(i==0){i=url.indexOf('/print/1/') + 1;}if(i==0){i=url.indexOf('&print=1');}if(i>0){url = url.substring(0,i);document.write('URL: '+url+' (http://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/'+url+')
');if (typeof FDCPUrl == 'function'){FDCPUrl();}else if(window.print){window.print()}else{alert('To print his page press Ctrl-P on your keyboard \nor choose print from your browser or device after clicking OK');}}</SCRIPT>URL: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/36496933/ns/business-stocks_and_economy/ (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/36496933/ns/business-stocks_and_economy/)

Chief Henry
04-14-2010, 08:15 AM
9.7% unemployment

mlyonsd
04-14-2010, 08:15 AM
AP
- April 14, 2010

Watchdog: Obama Foreclosure Aid Leaves Many Out

WASHINGTON -- A watchdog panel overseeing the financial bailouts says the Obama administration's flagship mortgage aid program lags well behind the foreclosure crisis and leaves too many families out.

The Congressional Oversight Panel says in a report released Wednesday that the administration projects only one million families will end up with lower monthly payments as a result of the program. The report says six million families are more than two months behind with their payments, and 200,000 more families receive foreclosure notices each month.

A year and a half after launching the program, "Treasury is still fighting to get its foreclosure programs off the ground," Elizabeth Warren, who heads the independent panel set up by Congress, told reporters Tuesday.

Warren warned that borrowers who have their monthly payments lowered as a result of the program still could lose their homes because the payments remain high and many Americans are facing new financial strains.

"Redefault signals the single worst form of failure" by the Treasury Department, said Warren, who is a professor at Harvard Law School.

"Billions of taxpayer dollars will be spent and families will nonetheless lose their homes."

The main program gives money to mortgage investors and collection companies that reduce borrowers' monthly payments.

Treasury highlighted the panel's finding that the administration has continued adjusting and expanding the program as the crisis deepens.

"We strongly agree with the (panel's) assessment that foreclosures are at an unacceptable high rate, which is why this program has been designed to prevent avoidable foreclosures," Treasury spokeswoman Meg Reilly said in a statement. She said the program was not designed to prevent every foreclosure, and "we cannot help those who simply bought a home they could not afford."

The report comes a day after top banking industry executives expressed skepticism about a new plan designed to help troubled borrowers by forgiving a portion of their debt.

The executives told lawmakers on Tuesday they are reducing the amount that troubled borrowers owe on their home loans only in limited cases. That's because consumers who are paying their mortgages on time are likely to see such reductions as unfair, they said.

Such programs "could raise issues of fairness," said Sanjiv Das, Citigroup's top mortgage executive, who appeared in front of the House Financial Services committee with top executives from Bank of America, Wells Fargo & Co. and JPMorgan Chase.

David Lowman, chief executive of Chase's mortgage business, told lawmakers that large-scale mortgage principal reduction "could be harmful to consumers, investors and future mortgage market conditions."

Chase estimates that reducing home loan balances so that no homeowners would owe more than the value of their homes would cost up to $900 billion, with $150 billion of that borne by the government.

Many homeowners aren't satisfied. After the hearing was over, dozens of activists from the Boston-based Neighborhood Assistance Corp. of America chased Lowman through the marble-floored hallways of the Rayburn House Office Building, pressing him to do more to help troubled homeowners.

He did not respond to their requests for a meeting and eventually left the building with the assistance of police.

The four mortgage companies represented at the hearing are the largest in the country and have come under fire for not doing enough to help borrowers as part of the Obama administration's $75 billion mortgage relief program.

Through March, more than 230,000 homeowners have completed loan modifications. That's about 21 percent of the 1.1 million borrowers who began the program over the past year, the Treasury Department said Tuesday.

Last month, the administration expanded the program, launching a plan to reduce the amount some troubled borrowers owe on their home loans and give jobless homeowners a temporary break. But the details of those programs are expected to take months to work out.

President Barack Obama's housing secretary, Shaun Donovan, said in a speech to a group of mortgage bankers Tuesday that administration did not foresee how much effort it would take for the mortgage industry to launch the program.

Many mortgage companies, he said, "were too slow to make the investments in systems and staff needed" to put the program in place. But he noted that many families are getting relief.

Republicans, however, say the Obama administration should abandon the effort and focus on creating jobs.

"The market needs to find its own footing free of government intervention and manipulation so we can revive our economy and get on with a full housing market recovery," said Rep. Spencer Bachus of Alabama, the committee's senior Republican.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/04/14/watchdog-obama-foreclosure-aid-leaves/#/politics/president/ci.Watchdog%3A+Obama+Foreclosure+Aid+Leaves+Many+Out.opinionPrint

The Mad Crapper
04-14-2010, 09:52 AM
"The market needs to find its own footing free of government intervention and manipulation so we can revive our economy and get on with a full housing market recovery," said Rep. Spencer Bachus of Alabama, the committee's senior Republican.



"I'm not sure I know the term in Austrian"

http://thepeoplescube.com/images/Obama_Coin_ExactChange_160.gif

Hopey Change™

BigRedChief
04-14-2010, 11:09 AM
Bernanke: Recovery has staying power
But Fed chief says growing deficit poses rising risk for the economy
By Jeannine Aversa
The Associated Press
updated 10:53 a.m. CT, Wed., April 14, 2010

<SCRIPT language=javascript> function UpdateTimeStamp(pdt) { var n = document.getElementById("udtD"); if(pdt != '' && n && window.DateTime) { var dt = new DateTime(); pdt = dt.T2D(pdt); if(dt.GetTZ(pdt)) {n.innerHTML = dt.D2S(pdt,(('false'.toLowerCase()=='false')?false:true));} } } UpdateTimeStamp('634068571886530000');</SCRIPT>
WASHINGTON - Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke told Congress Wednesday that he has confidence the unfolding economic recovery will have staying power, although it won't be strong enough to bring quick relief to high unemployment.

Bernanke, testifying before Congress' Joint Economic Committee, also once again called on lawmakers and the White House to come up with a plan to whittle down record-high budget deficits.

Even though sizable deficits right now are "unavoidable" given the damage wrought by the recession, the persistence of red ink raises risks to the country's long-term economic health, he said.

A credible plan to pare the deficit could provide the economy with benefits in the near term, including lower longer-term interest rates and increased consumer and business confidence, Bernanke told lawmakers.
"Addressing the country's fiscal problems will require difficult choices, but postponing them will only make them more difficult," he warned.

On the economy, Bernanke seemed slightly more optimistic that the fledgling recovery will keep on going after massive government stimulus fades later this year. Incoming economic barometers suggest that growth in demand by consumers and businesses "will be sufficient to promote a moderate economic recovery in coming quarters," he said.

Consumers spending again
Rep. Carolyn Maloney, D-N.Y., head of the committee, welcomed the message, but said the government must remain focused on "fixing the economy, putting people back to work and helping struggling families."
Consumers are spending again after having cut back sharply during the recession. Going forward, consumer spending should be helped by a gradual pick up in jobs, a slow recovery in household wealth from recent lows and some improvement in the ability to get loans, Bernanke said.
That assessment of consumers — whose spending accounts for 70 percent of national economic activity — also appeared more upbeat. In recent weeks, Bernanke and other Fed officials have cited a litany of headwinds facing consumers, including high unemployment, rising home foreclosures and sluggish wage growth.

Shoppers boosted retailers' sales by a strong 1.6 percent in March, a better than expected showing, the government reported on Wednesday. That's a promising sign that consumers will do their part to keep the recovery going.

Another government report showed that inflation remains tame. Consumer prices edged up 0.1 percent last month. Low inflation gives the Fed leeway to hold interest rates at rock-bottom levels to support the recovery. Despite a steep run-up in energy prices, inflation is under control, Bernanke said.

Fielding questions from lawmakers, Bernanke repeated the Fed's pledge to keep interest rates at record lows for an "extended period" to aid the recovery. Rates have been at super-low levels since December 2008.
At some point when the recovery is firmly entrenched, the Fed will need to start boosting rates to prevent any inflation problems.


The soonest the Federal Reserve will begin raising short-term interest rates is the fourth quarter, according to 34 of the 44 economists polled in a new AP Economy Survey that debuted on Monday.

Businesses, meanwhile, have boosted spending on equipment and software at a solid pace and factories are benefiting from stronger demand for U.S. exports, Bernanke noted. Improved financial conditions are also helping out the economy.

However, problems still remain.
Bernanke said weakness in the housing and commercial real-estate sectors is putting "significant restraints" on the pace of the economic recovery. And, the poor fiscal conditions of many state and local governments have led to continuing cutbacks in workers, another force that will hold back the recovery, he said.

"You got some giant issues," Sen. Sam Brownback, R-Kan., told Bernanke.
On the jobs front, Bernanke was encouraged by the 162,000 jobs added in March, the most in three years. However, the moderate pace of the economic recovery means that the 8 million-plus jobs lost by the recession won't quickly return. Bernanke said it will take a "significant amount of time" to restore those positions. He didn't say how long.

9.7 percent unemployment
The unemployment rate has been stuck at 9.7 percent for three straight months, close to its highest levels since the early 1980s.


Bernanke said he is especially concerned about that 44 percent of the unemployed in March had been without a job for six months or more. "Long periods without work erode individual's skills and hurt future employment prospects," he said. Younger workers may be particularly hurt if the weak labor market prevents them from finding a first job or from gaining important work experience, Bernanke said.

On other topics Bernanke said:
<LI class=textBodyBlack>China should let the value of its currency rise, a move that would support U.S. exports by making them cheaper to foreign buyers. <LI class=textBodyBlack>The Fed doesn't see speculative bubbles forming in assets such as stocks, bonds or commodities, at this point but is closely monitoring the situation. Some worry that the Fed's low rates will create another bubble like the one in housing that burst and threw the economy into a recession. <LI class=textBodyBlack>
Copyright 2010 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
<SCRIPT>var url=location.href;var i=url.indexOf('/did/') + 1;if(i==0){i=url.indexOf('/print/1/') + 1;}if(i==0){i=url.indexOf('&print=1');}if(i>0){url = url.substring(0,i);document.write('URL: '+url+' (http://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/'+url+')
');if (typeof FDCPUrl == 'function'){FDCPUrl();}else if(window.print){window.print()}else{alert('To print his page press Ctrl-P on your keyboard \nor choose print from your browser or device after clicking OK');}}</SCRIPT>URL: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/36496933/ns/business-stocks_and_economy/ (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/36496933/ns/business-stocks_and_economy/)

BigRedChief
04-14-2010, 11:10 AM
Upbeat forecasts propel stocks higher
S&P 500 tops 1,200; Bernanke signals that recovery has staying power
By Stephen Bernard and Tim Paradis
The Associated Press
updated 10:50 a.m. CT, Wed., April 14, 2010
<SCRIPT language=javascript> function UpdateTimeStamp(pdt) { var n = document.getElementById("udtD"); if(pdt != '' && n && window.DateTime) { var dt = new DateTime(); pdt = dt.T2D(pdt); if(dt.GetTZ(pdt)) {n.innerHTML = dt.D2S(pdt,(('false'.toLowerCase()=='false')?false:true));} } } UpdateTimeStamp('634068570530730000');</SCRIPT>
NEW YORK - Upbeat economic forecasts from Intel Corp. and JPMorgan Chase & Co. propelled stocks higher.

The gains Wednesday pushed the Standard & Poor's 500 index over the 1,200 mark for the first time in a year and a half. The Dow Jones industrial average rose about 60 points.

The market made a broad advance after a variety of indicators signaled the economy is recovering. Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke told Congress' Joint Economic Committee that the recovery should hold but that high budget deficits must be addressed.

Bernanke cautioned that high unemployment will remain an obstacle for the economy. He also repeated that interest rates will remain low for an "extended period." Some traders had worried that Bernanke would signal a shift in interest rate policy now that the economy appears to be strengthening. Low rates have helped propel assets like stocks higher.
The comments from Bernanke came after companies gave investors reasons to be confident. JPMorgan Chase reported a better-than-expected first-quarter profit. The bank is still facing big losses from failed consumer loans, but CEO Jamie Dimon said there have been clear improvements in the economy.

The earnings came a day after Intel also topped profit forecasts and raised its 2010 outlook.

Michael Binger, portfolio manager at Thrivent Investment Management in Minneapolis, said the strong results from leaders of the banking and technology industries are signs that the recovery is on track.
"It diminishes the chance that we go back into a double-dip recession," he said. "It lends credence that the financial industry is recovering and the tech industry is beyond recovering and is doing very well."

Stocks are also getting a boost from government reports showing retail sales rose again in March and inflation remains tame.

The market has been rising steadily for two months on encouraging signs of growth and the earnings and economic reports supported the gains.
In late morning trading, the Dow rose 62.05, or 0.6 percent, to 11,081.47. The S&P 500 index rose 7.95, or 0.7 percent, to 1,205.25, while the Nasdaq composite index rose 23.46, or 1 percent, to 2,489.45.

Bond prices were mixed. The yield on the benchmark 10-year Treasury note, which moves opposite its price, rose to 3.83 percent from 3.82 percent late Tuesday.

The dollar fell against other major currencies, while gold rose.
Crude oil rose $1.80 to $85.85 per barrel on the New York Mercantile Exchange.


Intel's first-quarter results easily topped analysts' expectations. The results indicated that businesses are stepping up their technology spending on growing confidence about the economy. Intel said its profit margin will be better than it had estimated for 2010 and that it plans to hire 1,000 workers.

Strength at JPMorgan Chase's investment bank helped offset losses from consumer loan defaults and propelled the company's profit above analysts' expectations. JPMorgan said it plans to add 9,000 employees in the U.S.
Intel and JPMorgan were the biggest gainers among the 30 stocks that make up the Dow industrials. Intel rose 67 cents, or 2.9 percent, to $23.44. JPMorgan rose $1.26, or 2.8 percent, to $47.13.

The government also offered investors signs the economy is improving. The Commerce Department said retail sales rose 1.6 percent in March, the third consecutive month of growth. That was bigger than the increase of 1.2 percent economists had expected, according to Thomson Reuters.
A Labor Department report indicated that inflation remained in check last month. The Consumer Price Index, a measure of inflation at the retail level, rose 0.1 percent in March. That was in line with economists' forecast.

The Fed has said that inflation is tame. Without an immediate threat of rising prices, policymakers have been able to hold the Fed's key interest rate at a record low of essentially zero. The Fed wants to hold rates down to stimulate lending and help revive the economy.

More than two stocks rose for every one that fell on the New York Stock Exchange, where volume came to 390.6 million shares, compared with 394.6 million shares traded at the same point Tuesday.

The Russell 2000 index of smaller companies rose 8.17, or 1.2 percent, to 715.20.

In afternoon trading, Britain's FTSE 100 gained 0.7 percent, Germany's DAX index rose 0.8 percent, and France's CAC-40 climbed 0.8 percent. Earlier, Japan's Nikkei stock average rose 0.4 percent.


© 2010 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
<SCRIPT>var url=location.href;var i=url.indexOf('/did/') + 1;if(i==0){i=url.indexOf('/print/1/') + 1;}if(i==0){i=url.indexOf('&print=1');}if(i>0){url = url.substring(0,i);document.write('URL: '+url+' (http://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/'+url+')
');if (typeof FDCPUrl == 'function'){FDCPUrl();}else if(window.print){window.print()}else{alert('To print his page press Ctrl-P on your keyboard \nor choose print from your browser or device after clicking OK');}}</SCRIPT>URL: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/36497325/ns/business-stocks_and_economy/ (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/36497325/ns/business-stocks_and_economy/)

petegz28
04-15-2010, 09:21 AM
Jobless claims jump in post-Easter volatility

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The number of U.S. workers filing new claims for jobless benefits unexpectedly soared last week as applications held back during the Easter holiday were processed, government data showed on Thursday.

Initial claims for state unemployment benefits rose 24,000 -- the largest increase in two months -- to a seasonally adjusted 484,000, the Labor Department said.

Analysts polled by Reuters had expected claims to dip to 440,000 from 460,000 the prior week, a number that was unrevised in Thursday's report.

A Labor Department official said the increase in claims last week was mainly due to administrative factors rather than economic ones. "I don't think there is a whole lot of layoffs going on," he said.

The four-week moving average of new claims, which irons out week-to-week volatility, rose 7,500 to 457,750.

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/Jobless-claims-jump-in-rb-505686255.html?x=0&.v=1


I see BRC has failed to report another negative report.....again.

BigRedChief
04-15-2010, 11:26 AM
Jobless claims jump in post-Easter volatility




I see BRC has failed to report another negative report.....again.Since when is it my job to post every frikkin article? You post whatever you want, I'll post whatever I want. You are no more impartial than anyone else. Do you really think there is some kind of dependant impartiality in place or you can't post articles? Get over yourself.

Hydrae
04-15-2010, 01:01 PM
I have been wondering how much of these increased sales being reported is due to every company out there giving deep discounts to get people in the stores. The car companies are all but giving their cars away and I have seen many ads for products at record low prices. I have to wonder if these numbers are actually reflecting a recovery or if the market is showing a short term increase due to pricing policies currrently in place.

The Mad Crapper
04-15-2010, 01:02 PM
Since when is it my job to post every frikkin article? You post whatever you want, I'll post whatever I want. You are no more impartial than anyone else. Do you really think there is some kind of dependant impartiality in place or you can't post articles? Get over yourself.

Are you done making a jackass out of yourself?

The Mad Crapper
04-16-2010, 10:20 AM
A question of not just academic interest

When did the recession end? Anybody know the date?

The American recession is over. In the summer of 2009 real GDP and industrial production hit bottom and resumed growth, and expansion in both measures strengthened as the year ended. Industrial production has continued to grow in early 2010 as, in all likelihood, has output. By the end of the current quarter the American economy may have returned to its pre-recession peak in real GDP.

Most economists agree about all of this. Prominent voices like Northwestern University’s Robert Gordon, Harvard’s Jeffrey Frankel, and Stanford’s Robert Hall have declared the recession dead and gone. But those men all sit on the National Bureau of Economic Research’s recession-dating committee, responsible for pinpointing the beginning and end of business cycles. On April 12th that committee announced that it was not able to set an official end-date for the American recession.

That a date has not yet been chosen is not that unusual; the committee has taken longer to decide in past recessions. The choice to delay a conclusive statement may have been an act of caution, to avoid a black eye in the event that the economy contracts again before reaching its previous peak.

But the suggestion that the economic pain is not yet definitively over struck a discordant note amid cheerier headlines. Earlier in the month this paper expressed the hope that a needed transition in the American economy had begun, and others have gone further. The New York Times and Washington Post have both featured business columnists arguing that Americans are too pessimistic about the strength of the economy. BusinessWeek praised the success of Obamanomics on its cover. Newsweek’s cover announced, “America’s Back! The Remarkable Tale of Our Economic Turnaround”.

Some optimism is warranted. Recent data indicate that recovery in manufacturing is well established, and service-industry expansion has picked up pace in each of the past three months. Labour markets are finally improving; during the first quarter of this year employment grew by 162,000 or 1.4m, depending on which data set you use. And investors have bought the idea of recovery. The Dow Jones Industrial Average has risen by over 10% since early February, and recently closed above 11,000 for the first time since September 2008.

But full-throated cheerleading is premature. By Mr Gordon’s calculations, much of the data point to June 2009 as the likely recession end-date. Since then the American economy has seen a net deterioration in employment by about 900,000 workers. The performance is by far the worst nine-month stretch following a recession of any post-war downturn . The last time the American unemployment rate rose above 10%, during the recession of 1981-82, the economy added between 1m and 2.5m jobs in the first nine months of recovery.

Meanwhile, housing markets look shaky just as government schemes to support the sector are ending. The Federal Reserve is not cheering: on April 14th Ben Bernanke, the chairman, predicted a “moderate” recovery amidst “significant restraints”. Small-business confidence declined in March for a second month. Any number of unpredictable shocks, from a big sovereign default to rapid monetary tightening in overheating emerging markets, could undermine the recovery.

No vulnerability is so worrisome as unemployment. As of March, 15m Americans were jobless, while another 9m were unwillingly working only part-time. Knowing just when the recession ended will not be of much comfort to them.

http://www.economist.com/

BigRedChief
04-22-2010, 02:52 PM
Existing home sales soar in March

<?xml:namespace prefix = fb /><fb:like class=" fb_edge_widget_with_comment fb_iframe_widget" href="http://money.cnn.com/2010/04/22/real_estate/March_existing_home_sales/index.htm" width="450" action="recommend" background="none" show_faces="false" layout="standard"></fb:like>By Julianne Pepitone (julianne.pepitone@turner.com), staff reporterApril 22, 2010: 12:11 PM ET

<!--startclickprintexclude-->
<!--endclickprintexclude--><!-- CONTENT -->NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) -- Existing home sales jumped 6.8% in March, with home buyers racing to get a tax credit that expires in April, according to a real estate industry report released Thursday.
The National Association of Realtors reported that existing home sales rose last month to a seasonally adjusted annual rate of 5.35 million units, up from the revised rate of 5.01 million in February. Sales year-over-year were up 16.1%.
<!-- REAP --><!--startclickprintexclude-->
Analysts surveyed by Briefing.com had expected the March sales rate to hit just 5.29 million annual units.



Home resales have been above year-ago levels for nine straight months, according to the report.

"Buoyed by the unseasonably warm weather, home owners were out en masse scooping-up bargain-priced real estate," said Bob Walters, chief economist at Quicken Loans, in a research note.

In its February report (http://money.cnn.com/2010/03/23/news/economy/existing_homesales_february/index.htm?postversion=2010032311), NAR said winter storms hurt figures for the month.
"Adding to the increase in sales [for March] is the looming deadline of the government's home buyer tax credit," Walters said.

First-time home buyers can qualify for a tax credit of up to $8,000 (http://money.cnn.com/2009/11/06/real_estate/tax_credit_extended/), while those who are trading up could get as much as $6,500. In either case, buyers must sign contracts by the end of April and close the deal before July 1 in order to get the credit.

Legislators have twice extended the deadline to obtain the tax credit, but a further extension is not expected.

The tax credit "has been a resounding success," NAR chief economist Lawrence Yun, said in a prepared statement. "This is preserving perhaps $1 trillion in largely middle class housing wealth that may have been wiped out."

<!-- REAP --><!--startclickprintexclude--><!-- KEEP -->0:00 /3:41Trump: Don't fear a real estate collapse<SCRIPT type=text/javascript>vidConfig.push({videoArray: ["/video/news/2010/04/05/n_co_trump_real_estate.cnnmoney.json"], collapsed:false});</SCRIPT> <!--endclickprintexclude--><!-- /REAP -->
Price and inventory: The median price of homes sold in March was $170,000, up 0.4% from March 2009. Distressed properties made up 35% of the houses sold during the month.
Total housing inventory rose 1.5% to 3.58 million existing homes for sale. That's an 8-month supply at the current selling pace, down from and 8.5 month supply in February.

Sales by property type: Single-family home sales rose 7.3% to a seasonally adjusted annual rate of 4.68 million in March from a pace of 4.36 million in February, and were 13.3% above the pace 12 months ago.
Condominium and co-op sales rose 3.1% to a seasonally adjusted annual rate of 670,000 units in March, from 650,000 in February, and were 39.3% above March 2008's rate.

Sales by region: Total existing home sales rose the most in the Midwest, up 7.2% in March to an annual pace of 1.19 million. That's up 15.5% from a year ago.
Sales in the South rose 7.1% to an annual rate of 1.97 million; the West gained 6.6% to 1.3 million; and the Northeast was up 6% to 890,000.

http://money.cnn.com/2010/04/22/real_estate/March_existing_home_sales/index.htm?hpt=T2

petegz28
04-22-2010, 04:29 PM
Home sales up in March is a predictable as gas going higher in the summer.

BigRedChief
04-23-2010, 12:04 PM
Home sales up in March is a predictable as gas going higher in the summer. New-home sales see biggest jump in 47 years = seasonal ROFL


New-home sales see biggest jump in 47 years
Sales surge 27 percent, the strongest month since July
By Alan Zibel
The Associated Press
updated 10:22 a.m. CT, Fri., April 23, 2010

<SCRIPT language=javascript> function UpdateTimeStamp(pdt) { var n = document.getElementById("udtD"); if(pdt != '' && n && window.DateTime) { var dt = new DateTime(); pdt = dt.T2D(pdt); if(dt.GetTZ(pdt)) {n.innerHTML = dt.D2S(pdt,(('false'.toLowerCase()=='false')?false:true));} } } UpdateTimeStamp('634076329680030000');</SCRIPT>
WASHINGTON - Sales of new homes surged 27 percent last month, bouncing off the previous month's record low and blowing past
expectations as government incentives and better weather boosted sales.
The Commerce Department said Friday that new-home sales rose in March to a seasonally adjusted annual sales pace of 411,000. It was the strongest month since last July and the biggest monthly increase in 47 years.

Economists surveyed by Thomson Reuters had expected a sales pace of 330,000. February's results were revised upward to 324,000, but remained an all-time low. Sales had been especially weak over the winter, partly due to bad weather in much of the country.

The median sales price was $214,000, up more than 4 percent from a year earlier but down more than 3 percent from February.

The new-home sales report reflects signed contracts to purchase homes rather than completed sales and thus gives economists a feel for how many buyers were out shopping for new homes in a given month.
It is likely capturing consumers who are trying to qualify for federal tax credits that will expire at the end of this month. The government is offering an $8,000 credit for first-time buyers and $6,500 for current homeowners who buy and move into another property.

To qualify, buyers must have a signed contract complete by the end of next week and must complete the transaction by the end of June.
"Everyone's just trying to sign on the dotted line," said Jennifer Lee, an economist with BMO Capital Markets.

Nearly 1.8 million households have used the credit at a cost of $12.6 billion, according to the Internal Revenue Service.

"These robust numbers say the credit is working," said David Crowe, chief economist at the National Association of Home Builders. He forecasts sales will rise through April, weaken modestly, and then remain stable through the rest of the year.

The rise in new-home sales was seen nationwide. Sales grew a whopping 44 percent in the South and 36 percent in the Northeast. They also rose about 6 percent in the West and 3 percent in the Midwest.

The number of new homes up for sale in March fell 2 percent to 228,000. At the current sales pace, it would take nearly 7 months to exhaust that supply.

Still, new-home sales are down 70 percent from their peak in July 2005, and some analysts predict they will sink back to the winter's dismal levels after the tax credit runs out.

"I expect we'll see a very sharp drop back," possibly to new record lows, said Paul Ashworth, senior U.S. economist with Capital Economics.

© 2010 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
<SCRIPT>var url=location.href;var i=url.indexOf('/did/') + 1;if(i==0){i=url.indexOf('/print/1/') + 1;}if(i==0){i=url.indexOf('&print=1');}if(i>0){url = url.substring(0,i);document.write('URL: '+url+' (http://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/'+url+')
');if (typeof FDCPUrl == 'function'){FDCPUrl();}else if(window.print){window.print()}else{alert('To print his page press Ctrl-P on your keyboard \nor choose print from your browser or device after clicking OK');}}</SCRIPT>URL: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/36735173/ns/business-real_estate/ (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/36735173/ns/business-real_estate/)

petegz28
04-23-2010, 12:28 PM
New-home sales see biggest jump in 47 years = seasonal ROFL




Like I said, home sales going up in the Spring is rather predictable. You're not very good at this economics game.

Also, WTF is the report about durable goods being down? I see you cherry picked another one.

And not to be the bearer of bad news, once the tax credit for buying a new home expires then things will taper off.

The Mad Crapper
04-23-2010, 12:31 PM
New-home sales see biggest jump in 47 years = seasonal ROFL


New-home sales see biggest jump in 47 years
Sales surge 27 percent, the strongest month since July
By Alan Zibel
The Associated Press
updated 10:22 a.m. CT, Fri., April 23, 2010

<SCRIPT language=javascript> function UpdateTimeStamp(pdt) { var n = document.getElementById("udtD"); if(pdt != '' && n && window.DateTime) { var dt = new DateTime(); pdt = dt.T2D(pdt); if(dt.GetTZ(pdt)) {n.innerHTML = dt.D2S(pdt,(('false'.toLowerCase()=='false')?false:true));} } } UpdateTimeStamp('634076329680030000');</SCRIPT>
WASHINGTON - Sales of new homes surged 27 percent last month, bouncing off the previous month's record low and blowing past
expectations as government incentives and better weather boosted sales.
The Commerce Department said Friday that new-home sales rose in March to a seasonally adjusted annual sales pace of 411,000. It was the strongest month since last July and the biggest monthly increase in 47 years.

Economists surveyed by Thomson Reuters had expected a sales pace of 330,000. February's results were revised upward to 324,000, but remained an all-time low. Sales had been especially weak over the winter, partly due to bad weather in much of the country.

The median sales price was $214,000, up more than 4 percent from a year earlier but down more than 3 percent from February.

The new-home sales report reflects signed contracts to purchase homes rather than completed sales and thus gives economists a feel for how many buyers were out shopping for new homes in a given month.
It is likely capturing consumers who are trying to qualify for federal tax credits that will expire at the end of this month. The government is offering an $8,000 credit for first-time buyers and $6,500 for current homeowners who buy and move into another property.

To qualify, buyers must have a signed contract complete by the end of next week and must complete the transaction by the end of June.
"Everyone's just trying to sign on the dotted line," said Jennifer Lee, an economist with BMO Capital Markets.

Nearly 1.8 million households have used the credit at a cost of $12.6 billion, according to the Internal Revenue Service.

"These robust numbers say the credit is working," said David Crowe, chief economist at the National Association of Home Builders. He forecasts sales will rise through April, weaken modestly, and then remain stable through the rest of the year.

The rise in new-home sales was seen nationwide. Sales grew a whopping 44 percent in the South and 36 percent in the Northeast. They also rose about 6 percent in the West and 3 percent in the Midwest.

The number of new homes up for sale in March fell 2 percent to 228,000. At the current sales pace, it would take nearly 7 months to exhaust that supply.

Still, new-home sales are down 70 percent from their peak in July 2005, and some analysts predict they will sink back to the winter's dismal levels after the tax credit runs out.

"I expect we'll see a very sharp drop back," possibly to new record lows, said Paul Ashworth, senior U.S. economist with Capital Economics.

© 2010 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
<SCRIPT>var url=location.href;var i=url.indexOf('/did/') + 1;if(i==0){i=url.indexOf('/print/1/') + 1;}if(i==0){i=url.indexOf('&print=1');}if(i>0){url = url.substring(0,i);document.write('URL: '+url+' (http://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/'+url+')
');if (typeof FDCPUrl == 'function'){FDCPUrl();}else if(window.print){window.print()}else{alert('To print his page press Ctrl-P on your keyboard \nor choose print from your browser or device after clicking OK');}}</SCRIPT>URL: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/36735173/ns/business-real_estate/ (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/36735173/ns/business-real_estate/)

Wow! That's awesome! Foriegners buying up foreclosed homes and renting them out to section 8 scumbags, turning entire neighborhoods and towns into ghetto's!

Chief Henry
04-23-2010, 12:38 PM
Much of that 47% bump has more todo with that 1st time home buyers contracts needing to be sighned by the end of April, much like the Cash for Clunkers moving new car sales.

Not much to get excited over imo.

The Mad Crapper
04-23-2010, 01:01 PM
A look at H.R. 2454 (Cap and trade bill) This is unbelievable!

Beginning 1 year after enactment of the Cap and Trade Act, you won't be able to sell your home unless you retrofit it to comply with the energy and water efficiency standards of this Act. H.R. 2454, the "Cap & Trade" bill passed by the House of Representatives, if also passed by the Senate, will be the largest tax increase any of us has ever experienced.

The Congressional Budget Office (supposedly non-partisan) estimates that in just a few years the average cost to every family of four will be $6,800 per year.

The Mad Crapper
04-25-2010, 03:17 PM
Worst president, ever

http://pics.livejournal.com/tj9582/pic/00078f00/

banyon
04-25-2010, 03:25 PM
A look at H.R. 2454 (Cap and trade bill) This is unbelievable!

Beginning 1 year after enactment of the Cap and Trade Act, you won't be able to sell your home unless you retrofit it to comply with the energy and water efficiency standards of this Act. H.R. 2454, the "Cap & Trade" bill passed by the House of Representatives, if also passed by the Senate, will be the largest tax increase any of us has ever experienced.

The Congressional Budget Office (supposedly non-partisan) estimates that in just a few years the average cost to every family of four will be $6,800 per year.

It's unbelievable because it's false. This unsourced mass email you cut and pasted without giving credit has already been debunked:


http://www.factcheck.org/2009/07/energy-bill-and-existing-homes/

It’s true that the bill sets new national efficiency standards for new residential and commercial buildings. It calls for buildings to be 30 percent more efficient by 2012, and 50 percent more efficient beginning in 2014. It ultimately calls for buildings to be 75 percent more efficient by 2029. But those efficiency benchmarks apply only to homes constructed after the bill becomes law, not currently existing ones.
We found no requirement for energy audits or energy-efficiency inspections in the bill, either. Nor did the National Association of Home Builders, according to Calli Barker Schmidt, the organization’s director of environmental communications. "Inspections are usually required by banks and mortgage companies when a home changes hands – but if you are talking specifically about energy-efficiency checks, or an energy audit, it is not required for existing homes," she told FactCheck.org in an e-mail.
Owners of existing homes would be able to get energy audits if they wish, and if they volunteer for programs established by the bill, such as the Retrofit for Energy and Environmental Performance (REEP) program. That program would provide federal funds to states to encourage homeowners to reduce energy consumption. According to the bill, the purpose of REEP is to "facilitate the retrofitting of existing buildings across the United States to achieve maximum cost-effective energy efficiency improvements and significant improvements in water use and other environmental attributes." But facilitating energy efficiency improvements is not the same thing as requiring them.

The Mad Crapper
04-25-2010, 03:35 PM
[COLOR="Blue"] But facilitating energy efficiency improvements is not the same thing as requiring them.

Spoken like a true Browncoat.

We are only facilitating, comrade. No one is required to do anything.

banyon
04-25-2010, 03:40 PM
Spoken like a true Browncoat.

We are only facilitating, comrade. No one is required to do anything.

Does the federal government force people to take student loans? How about the new first time homebuyer credit?

Spoken like a true serial exaggerator and translucent charlatan.

BigRedChief
04-26-2010, 08:13 AM
Economists say
recovery looks
stronger than
expected

Updated 12h 10m ago

By Paul Davidson and Barbara Hansen, USA TODAY

The recovery is shaping up to be stronger than
expected and there is little risk the economy will
slip back into a recession, according to USA
TODAY's quarterly survey of 46 leading economists.

Yet most still say the rebound will fall short of the
sharp, V-shaped upturns that often follow severe
slumps, and the 9.7% jobless rate will fall slowly.

As the Fed meets to assess the economy this week,
seven in 10 economists say they're more optimistic
than they were three months ago.

"I think we've gotten to a point where it's a self-
sustaining recovery," says Standard & Poor's chief
economist David Wyss.

The experts predict growth of 3% this year, up from
forecasts of 2.8% in January. In V-shaped upswings,
growth is often 7% or more.

None see a return to recession by next year, and
those who see some risk say it's lessened markedly.

"I feel more confident ... there'll be no relapse," says


Stuart Hoffman, chief economist of PNC Financial
Services Group.

Yet while the economists say unemployment will fall
steadily this year, their median estimates are for a
9.4% jobless rate at year's end and 8.5% at the end
of 2011. More than 80% say the U.S. won't regain all
jobs lost in the recession until 2013 or later.

Why the brighter outlook? Consumers are opening
their wallets more widely than expected. Retail sales
climbed at a 10.1% annualized rate the past three
months, highest in four years. Economists cite
rising incomes, a stock market rally that makes
shoppers feel wealthier and abating fears of layoffs.

Also, manufacturers are feverishly replenishing
stocks to meet growing demand. And exports are
swelling company earnings.

Wyss, though, cites "big headwinds." Consumers, he
says, are too burdened by high debt to continue
their spending sprees. The expiration of a home
buyers' tax credit Friday will dampen housing sales.
And the government's $787 billion economic
stimulus package will be gone by late 2010.

Dean Maki, chief U.S. economist of Barclays Capital,
is more bullish. He says the stock rally and growing
incomes will let consumers pay off debts while
increasing spending. And homes are cheap enough
to goose sales even after the tax credit expires, he
says. He predicts 3.8% growth this year.

Some economists worry mortgage rates will drift
higher now that the Fed has ended its purchases of
mortgage-backed securities. But 67% say rates will
rise less than half a percentage point this year.

Chief Henry
04-26-2010, 09:14 AM
7 banks were taken over by the FDIC last Friday, all were in Illinoise, 57 for the year.

Brainiac
04-26-2010, 12:22 PM
http://voices.washingtonpost.com/tomtoles/2010/04/16/c_04192010.gif
It would be nice if the recovery included some jobs for the people who have lost them.

KC native
04-26-2010, 12:41 PM
A good column from Hussman

April 26, 2010

Looking Back, Looking Forward

John P. Hussman, Ph.D.
All rights reserved and actively enforced.
Reprint Policy

As of last week, our most comprehensive measure of market valuation reached a price-to-normalized earnings multiple of 19.1, exceeding the peaks of August 1987 (18.6) and December 1973 (18.3). Outside of the valuations achieved during the late 1990's bubble and the approach to the 2007 market peak, the only other historical observation exceeding the current level of valuation was the extreme of 20.1 reached just prior to the 1929 crash. The corollary to this level of rich valuation is that our projection for 10-year total returns for the S&P 500 is now just 5.3% annually.

While a number of simple measures of valuation have also been useful over the years, even metrics such as price-to-peak earnings have been skewed by the unusual profit margins we observed at the 2007 peak, which were about 50% above the historical norm - reflecting the combination of booming and highly leveraged financial sector profits as well as wide margins in cyclical and commodity-oriented industries. Accordingly, using price-to-peak requires the additional assumption that the profit margins observed in 2007 will be sustained indefinitely. Our more comprehensive measures do not require such assumptions, and reflect both direct estimates of normalized earnings, and compound estimates derived from revenues, profit margins, book values, and return-on-equity.

That said, valuations have never been useful as an indicator of near-term market fluctuations - a shortcoming that has been amplified since the late 1990's. The lesson that valuations are important to long-term investment outcomes is underscored by the fact that the S&P 500 has lagged Treasury bills over the past 13 years, including dividends. Yet the fact that these 13 years have included three successive approaches (2000, 2007, and today) to valuation peaks - at the very extremes of historical experience - is evidence that investors don't appreciate the link between valuation and subsequent returns. So they will predictably experience steep losses and mediocre returns yet again. Ironically, before they do, it also means that investors who take valuations seriously (including us) can expect temporary periods of frustration.

I've long noted that the analysis of market action can help to overcome some of this frustration, as stocks have often provided good returns despite rich valuations so long as market internals were strong, and the environment was not yet characterized by a syndrome of overvalued, overbought, overbullish, and rising yield conditions. In hindsight, the stock market has followed this typical post-war pattern, and we clearly could have captured some portion of the market's gains over the past year had I ignored the risk of a second wave of credit strains (which I remain concerned about, primarily over the coming months).

It is important to recognize, however, that even if we had approached the recent economic environment as a typical, run-of-the-mill postwar downturn, we would now be defensive again, as a result of the current overvalued, overbought, overbullish, rising yields syndrome. I do recognize that my credibility in sounding a cautious note would presently be stronger if I had ignored further credit risks and captured some of the past year's gains. But the awful outcome of this same set of conditions, which we also observed in 2007, should provide enough credibility.

Looking Back, Looking Forward

Last year, in the August 31 market comment A Tale of Two Data Sets, I observed "If we had a reasonable basis to believe that the recent economic downturn was an ordinary run-of-the-mill post-war recession having no lasting structural impact, and believed that the record profit margins observed in 2007 (about 50% above the historical norm) could be recovered and sustained, we would infer an average return/risk profile for the market that is still much less favorable than we have normally observed following bear market lows, but strong enough to warrant the removal of a good portion of our hedges outright, with a willingness to remove another portion of our hedges on market weakness.

"On the other hand, using the same essential measures of valuation and market action, but including periods of major economic dislocation into the dataset, produces average return/risk inferences that are substantially less favorable. Indeed, the reason we were somewhat “burned” during the fourth quarter of 2008 is that we expected – too early, in hindsight – a powerful rebound from the extremely oversold conditions we observed, based on normal market behavior. The larger dataset also includes periods of similarly powerful rebounds – but the attempt to participate in them is less appealing due to their lack of predictability as well as their sometimes abrupt and costly endings."

Given that valuations and market action have generally been a useful guide to setting investment exposure in normal post-war market cycles, it may be helpful to detail how these factors behaved during the period between 1929 to 1935, which represents the greatest period of credit strains observed in U.S. data. Though not all of the data we use in our market and economic analysis is available for this period, some of it can be estimated and proxied enough to allow us to characterize the key results. The results below are specific to methods we actually use, but I expect that they could be broadly replicated using any basic combination of valuations (say, Shiller PEs), and market action (say, moving averages or breadth measures).

At the outset, I should note that overall, our general criteria of valuation and market action would have been quite helpful during the Depression. When we apply the methods that we developed for post-war data to Depression-era data, we find that there was clearly sufficient evidence from valuations and market action to warrant a strong avoidance of risk during much of that period, and eventually to establish a significant exposure to market fluctuations.

But here is the difficulty. The primary benefit of the market action criteria was in avoiding risk, while nearly all of the gains from applying our approach would have been attributable to the valuation considerations we use. While applying post-war criteria would have resulted in an overall gain between 1929 and 1935, the bulk of that gain was driven by market exposure accepted during periods of exceptionally low valuations. Negative market action was a powerful signal to avoid market risk, but except when valuations were extremely favorable, positive market action contributed nothing on its own.

What is most striking about Depression-era data between 1929-1935 (and post-credit crisis data more generally) is that when we examine periods when one would generally grade market action as favorable on the basis of major trends and market internals, we find that taking positive exposures would actually have resulted in a net loss. This is due to the abruptness of trend reversals, so even periodic gains of 30-50% would have been largely erased through a combination of abrupt initial losses and subsequent whipsaws. While the compound net loss from periods of "trend following" over the full period was tolerable (about a -25% drawdown), that figure represents a combination of large individual gains and losses - substantial volatility, with a negative overall contribution to returns.

Partitioning the data provides a clearer picture. When valuations exceeded even 12 times normalized earnings (on our most comprehensive measure discussed above), seemingly "favorable" market action was followed by profound losses averaging -69.8% on an annualized basis (generally reflecting a few weeks of vertical losses until enough damage was done to kick the market action measures negative). Once the initial damage was done coming off of the uptrend, valuations over about 12 were still hostile, but were associated with slightly less profound losses averaging -37.7% annualized.

In contrast, only when valuations became quite depressed did the combination of favorable valuations and market action produce positive subsequent returns. Multiples below 12, coupled with favorable market action, were associated with annualized returns of 12.5%, while multiples below 12 coupled with unfavorable market action were associated with further mild losses averaging -4.5% annualized.

In 2009, we observed only a few weeks in March when the S&P 500 was priced at less than 12 times normalized earnings (again, on our best measure). At that time, indicators of market action were still negative. Faced with two possible data sets, one assuming further credit strains and one assuming that the problems had been solved, I noted "even giving the two possibilities equal weight is harsh, because as I've repeatedly noted, post-crash markets have included advances as large, and larger, than we've observed since March, but with devastating follow-through." Needless to say, sharply negative return figures don't "average in" very well.

How to respond?

Which brings us to the present. As of last week, even from a strictly post-war standpoint, a defensive investment stance is warranted, based on a syndrome of overvalued, overbought, overbullish and rising-yield conditions. Equally important is how to respond appropriately as these conditions change.

First, my primary concern with regard to fresh credit strains would be the period of recognition. We may very well have a multi-year period over which the full effects of deleveraging is actually felt, but the most damaging declines often occur where reality departs materially from expectations. The past year has been seen an easing of credit strains even as the volume of delinquent loans has hit new records, partially because of the abandonment of mark-to-market accounting, and partly because mortgages are long-term assets and it's possible to kick the can down the road with mortgages that aren't being serviced. It's unlikely in any event that these problems have actually been solved, because we can't reconcile the quantity of delinquent loans with the tamer figures for foreclosures and writedowns. Still, we need several more months of data before we can start relying on "extend and pretend" to dispense with the problem through an extended period of chargeoffs and Fannie/Freddie bailouts. Meanwhile, I remain concerned.

The economy and the markets have enjoyed a great deal of positive effect from the enormous deficit spending of the past 18 months (if it doesn't seem that the economy has benefited, consider the dismal the profile of GDP and personal income when stimulus spending and transfer payments are excluded). It's not at all clear that these effects are durable, and it's also not clear to what extent bank assets have been marked up, passed off to Fannie and Freddie, or otherwise obscured.

Here is precisely how we plan to approach the current uncertainties.

First, over the next few months, we are continuing to allow for uncertainty as to whether we should assume a "typical post-war" cycle or a "post-crash, credit strained" environment. As noted above, the primary distinction between these data sets is how the market responds to valuations and market action. Accordingly, the main strategic difference between "post-war" and "credit-strained" criteria is that valuations take a larger role relative to market action in a deleveraging cycle.

Over the course of 2010, absent very clear (i.e. crisis-level) additional credit strains, our weighting toward "post-war" criteria will increase in an approximately linear way. If we don't observe a significant second-wave of credit strains this year, I am comfortable with our standard post-war criteria to address any residual risks. If we do observe such strains, my primary concern would be the initial period of recognition. We would still gradually move our weights toward "post-war" criteria, but at a slower rate.

Based on the convexity analysis that I discussed late last year, my impression is that it is more appropriate to weight investment positions rather than expected returns from the two possible data sets. For example, if we weight expected returns, it is nearly impossible to give any weight at all to a credit strained environment and still justify a positive investment position, because of the size of the losses that can emerge in credit-strained conditions. In contrast, if the investment position would be zero based on "credit strained" criteria and 60% based on typical post-war criteria, a 60/40 weighting, respectively, would result in a weighted exposure of 24%.

Presently, if the Market Climate was to improve based on our standard post-war criteria, we would move 40-50% in the direction of that exposure. For example, if the market declines enough to clear the overbought, and overbullish components of present conditions, or if yields decline sufficiently to remove the present upward pressures we observe, and provided that market internals do not deteriorate notably, we would be left with a strenuously overvalued market, but with favorable market action and no negative syndromes. That wouldn't warrant a fully invested position in any event, but we would become decidedly more constructive.

What if the market simply moves higher? It is safe to say that at current valuations, a continued extension of overvalued, overbought, overbullish conditions, with no reprieve from interest rate pressures, would keep us in a hedged stance. The Strategic Growth Fund is not appropriate for investors who wish to speculate under that specific set of conditions, because we have no historical evidence that it is sensible to take market risk, on average, once that syndrome emerges.

Ideally, any removal of the current overvalued, overbought, overbullish, rising-yields syndrome would involve a substantial improvement in valuations, an initial deterioration in market action, and then an eventual firming of internals. That outcome would allow us much greater latitude in accepting market exposure.

In short, accepting a greater level of market exposure will require, at minimum, that we clear the present syndrome of overvalued, overbought, overbullish, rising-yield conditions. The quickest way to a more constructive investment stance would be a meaningful improvement in valuations (which would most likely be associated initially with a deterioration in market action), and no further credit strains. That would allow us to establish a strong market exposure on early evidence of improved market action. If we do observe significant fresh credit strains, our valuation criteria will be more demanding, particularly in the initial recognition phase. In any event, however, we will gradually transition toward standard "post-war" criteria as we move through 2010 - slower if we observe credit strains, but otherwise in a roughly linear way as we move through the year.

Presently, the market is strenuously overvalued, faces a syndrome of overextended conditions that has historically proved hostile, and relies on the absence of further credit strains to an extent that strikes me as incredible. Our investment objective continues to focus on outperforming our benchmarks over the complete market cycle, with smaller periodic losses than a passive investment strategy. We've achieved that objective since the inception of the Funds, and I'm comfortable that we have the tools to achieve that objective as we go forward. I frankly don't know which direction the market is headed here, but I hope I've made it clear how I expect to approach the evidence, and why.

Market Climate

As of last week, the Market Climate in stocks remained characterized by an overvalued, overbought, overbullish, rising-yields syndrome that has historically produced periods of marginal new highs, slight declines, and yet further marginal highs, followed somewhat unpredictably by nearly vertical drops. I've often accompanied the description of this syndrome with the word "excruciating," because the apparent resiliency of the market and the celebration of each fresh high, can make it difficult to maintain a defensive stance. Interestingly, the analysts at Nautilus Capital recently noted that the most closely correlated periods in market history to this one were the advances of 1929 and 2007. While exact replication of those advances would allow for a couple more weeks of further strength, we've generally found it dangerous to expect history to do more than rhyme. These hostile syndromes have a tendency to erase weeks of upside progress in a few days.

In bonds, the Market Climate last week remained characterized by relatively neutral yield levels and unfavorable yield pressures. While we would be inclined to increase the duration of the Strategic Total Return Fund modestly if the 10-year Treasury yield was to push beyond 4% or so, we are comfortable with our current duration of just under 4 years. For now, I continue to be concerned about potential credit strains, which may provide the opportunity to accumulate precious metals, TIPS, and possibly foreign currency exposure on associated price weakness.

BigRedChief
04-26-2010, 12:49 PM
A good column from HussmanTranslation into English? Cliff notes please?

KC native
04-26-2010, 01:00 PM
Translation into English? Cliff notes please?

I guess there was more fund specific stuff in there than I thought and without background it is a little confusing.

Basically, he's saying that the market is extremely overvalued and breaks down how it is overvalued and compares it to other periods. He says that it can go higher but he doesn't think it is prudent to add to positions right now based on valuation measures and the second wave of issues in the credit crisis.

Hussman is very valuation sensitive and his investment allocation is dictated by 4 scenarios.

1.Favorable valuations and favorable market action-here he would be 100% equities with no hedging.

2. Favorable valuations and unfavorable market action-100% equities with hedges in place

3. Unfavorable valuations and favorable market action-80% equities with very stringent hedging

4. Unfavorable valuations and unfavorable market action- here he would be in treasuries and other low risk assets with stringent hedging.

BigRedChief
04-26-2010, 01:03 PM
I guess there was more fund specific stuff in there than I thought and without background it is a little confusing.

Basically, he's saying that the market is extremely overvalued and breaks down how it is overvalued and compares it to other periods. He says that it can go higher but he doesn't think it is prudent to add to positions right now based on valuation measures and the second wave of issues in the credit crisis.

Hussman is very valuation sensitive and his investment allocation is dictated by 4 scenarios.

1.Favorable valuations and favorable market action-here he would be 100% equities with no hedging.

2. Favorable valuations and unfavorable market action-100% equities with hedges in place

3. Unfavorable valuations and favorable market action-80% equities with very stringent hedging

4. Unfavorable valuations and unfavorable market action- here he would be in treasuries and other low risk assets with stringent hedging.Thanks for trying but I still don't get it. Is it, The market is overvalued and you'd better be a cautious investor?

KC native
04-26-2010, 01:36 PM
Thanks for trying but I still don't get it. Is it, The market is overvalued and you'd better be a cautious investor?

Yes, he's saying that it doesn't make sense to add/add to positions based upon just about every valuation measure you can think of. Without listening to his conference calls, he's probably hedging 70-80% of his equity exposure.

Chief Henry
04-26-2010, 01:51 PM
In other words, be dam careful with your serious money.

BigRedChief
04-27-2010, 06:50 AM
A bumpy economic recovery, with hope in Midwest, South

<!--endclickprintexclude--><SCRIPT type=text/javascript>var storyURL = "http://www.usatoday.com/money/economy/2010-04-26-economic-turnaround_N.htm"; </SCRIPT><SCRIPT type=text/javascript>var storyTitle = "A bumpy economic recovery, with hope in Midwest, South ";var articleSummary = "By almost any measure, the economic recovery is in full swing. More factories are humming again. The stock market is roaring. Even consumers are loosening viselike grips on their wallets. ";</SCRIPT><!-- EdSysObj ID="SSI-A" FRAGMENTID="30348882" ibirman -->

<SCRIPT type=text/javascript> if (typeof(articleSummary) == 'undefined'){ var articleSummary =""; } <!-- yahoobuzz script --> var articleSource = "USATODAY.com"; var yahooBuzzArticleId = 'usatoday:'+storyURL+'?csp=34'; var yahooBuzzBadgeType = 'text'; <!-- twitter script --> var twtUrl = 'http://usat.me?'+tagID+''; var maxLength = 140 - (twtUrl.length + 1); var twtSource = 'RT @USATODAY' if (storyTitle.length > maxLength) { storyTitle = storyTitle.substr(0, (maxLength - 5))+'...'; } var twtLink = 'http://twitter.com/home?status='+encodeURIComponent( twtSource + ' ' + storyTitle + ' ' + twtUrl ); <!-- myspace script --> function GetThis(T, C, U, L) { var targetUrl = 'http://www.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=postto&' + 't=' + encodeURIComponent(T) + '&c=' + encodeURIComponent(C) + '&u=' + encodeURIComponent(U) + '&l=' + L; window.open(targetUrl); } var sclListTop = ""; sclListTop +=''; sclListTop +='

'; sclListTop +='
Share'; sclListTop +='
<!-- this element will be replaced -->'; sclListTop +='
Add to Mixx (http://mixx.com/submit/story?page_url='+storyURL+'&partner=usat)'; sclListTop +='
Facebook (http://www.facebook.com/sharer.php?u='+storyURL+'&title='+storyTitle+')'; sclListTop +='
<a href="'+twtLink+'" onClick="uoTrack(\'twitter\')" target="_blank"'+'>Twitter<'+'/a>'; sclListTop +='
'; sclListTop +=' '; sclListTop +=' '; sclListTop +='

'; sclListTop +='
More'; sclListTop +='

'; sclListTop +='
Fark (http://cgi.fark.com/cgi/fark/farkit.pl?u='+storyURL+'&h='+storyTitle+')'; sclListTop +='
Digg (http://digg.com/submit?phase=2&url='+storyURL+'&title='+storyTitle+'&topic=)'; sclListTop +='
Reddit (http://reddit.com/submit?url='+storyURL+'&title='+storyTitle+')'; sclListTop +='
MySpace (http://www.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=postto&u='+storyURL+'&t='+storyTitle+')'; sclListTop +='
StumbleUpon (http://www.stumbleupon.com/submit?url='+storyURL+'&h='+storyTitle+')'; sclListTop +='
Propeller (http://www.propeller.com/story/submit/?url='+storyURL+'&title='+storyTitle+')'; sclListTop +='
LinkedIn (http://www.linkedin.com/shareArticle?mini=true&url='+storyURL+'&title='+storyTitle+'&summary='+articleSummary+'&source='+articleSource+')'; sclListTop +='
'; sclListTop +=' '; sclListTop +='
'; sclListTop +='
'; sclListTop +='
'; sclListTop +='
'; jQuery("#topSocialButtons").append(sclListTop);</SCRIPT><SCRIPT type=text/javascript> jQuery(".share-nav").treeview({control: ".treecontrol",animated: "medium",collapsed: true});jQuery(function() { jQuery.ajax({ type: "GET", url: "/marketing/rss/settings.xml", dataType: "xml", success: BuildSubscribeButtons });});function BuildSubscribeButtons(xml) { // Build SSTS array var url = document.location.toString(); var urlArray = url.split("/") var nurl = ""; for (i = 3; i < urlArray.length - 1; i++) { if(i<urlArray.length-2){ nurl += urlArray + "|"; } else { nurl += urlArray; } } var feedid = ""; var feedname = ""; var idx = 1; while (feedid == "" && idx>0) { idx = nurl.indexOf('|'); jQuery(xml).find('add').each(function(){ if (jQuery(this).attr('key') == nurl) { feedid = jQuery(this).attr('value'); } }); if (feedid == "") { nurl = nurl.replace(/(.*)\|(.*)/,"$1"); } } jQuery(xml).find('add').each(function(){ if (jQuery(this).attr('key') == feedid) { feedname = jQuery(this).attr('value'); } }); if (feedname == "") feedname = "usatoday-NewsTopStories.xml"; var sclListTop = ""; sclListTop +=''; sclListTop +='

'; <!-- divider --> sclListTop +='
Subscribe'; <!-- subscribe buttons --> sclListTop +='
iGoogle (http://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/' + 'http://add.my.yahoo.com/rss?url=http://rssfeeds.usatoday.com/' + escape(feedname) + ')'; sclListTop +='
'; sclListTop +=' '; sclListTop +=' '; sclListTop +='

'; sclListTop +='
More'; sclListTop +='

'; sclListTop +='
myAOL (http://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/' + 'http://www.netvibes.com/subscribe.php?url=http://rssfeeds.usatoday.com/' + escape(feedname) + ')'; sclListTop +='
'; sclListTop +=' '; sclListTop +='
'; sclListTop +='
'; sclListTop +='
'; sclListTop +='

'; <!-- what's this --> sclListTop +='
'; sclListTop +='
'; sclListTop +='
'; sclListTop +='
'; jQuery("#topSocialButtons").append(sclListTop); jQuery(".subscribe-nav").treeview({control: ".treecontrol",animated: "medium",collapsed: true});}</SCRIPT><SCRIPT src="http://d.yimg.com/ds/badge.js" ____yb="1"></SCRIPT><!-- /EdSysObj -->By Paul Davidson (http://content.usatoday.com/topics/reporter/Paul+Davidson), USA TODAY
By almost any measure, the economic recovery is in full swing. More factories are humming again. The stock market is roaring. Even consumers are loosening viselike grips on their wallets.
But the nascent rebound is not a massive wave that's sweeping every corner of the USA at the same time with equal force. Rather, it's arriving in ripples that are lifting different cities at different times and with varying strength.

While big chunks of the Midwest and South are recovering, much of the Northeast and West are still mired in recessions that are easing in severity.

Only 41 of 135 metropolitan areas in the Northeast and West were in recovery in February, according to Moody's Economy.com. By contrast, two-thirds of the 249 metro areas in the Midwest and South were on the upswing based on the February data, the latest available.
The regional differences can be traced to the course of the upturn.

It was ignited last summer by a manufacturing revival as many types of factories ramped up production to replenish inventories that had been drawn down during the recession, says Mark Zandi, Moody's chief economist.

The surge first buoyed the nation's midsection before spreading to the Southeast. An exception is Florida, which is still reeling from the housing bust.

Perked-up factories are lifting cities with transportation and distribution centers, such as Louisville, home of UPS' air hub, where an average 226 flights depart and arrive each day.

Meanwhile, a technology boom fueled by mobile Web crazes such as the iPhone has boosted tech research and manufacturing centers such as Austin; Raleigh, N.C.; and California's Silicon Valley, says Wells Fargo (http://content.usatoday.com/topics/topic/Organizations/Companies/Banking,+Financial,+Insurance,+Law/Wells+Fargo) economist Mark Vitner.

By fall, a comeback in professional and financial services should power the economies of larger cities such as New York (http://content.usatoday.com/topics/topic/Places,+Geography/States,+Territories,+Provinces,+Islands/U.S.+States/New+York), Chicago and Denver and banking hubs such as Charlotte, Zandi says. The Big Apple (http://content.usatoday.com/topics/topic/Brands/Consumer+Products/Apple) lost about 45,000 of its 350,000 traders, brokers and other finance workers in the downturn, but Wall Street firms such as JPMorgan Chase say they will increase hiring substantially this year.

Zandi says it could take about a year for states hurt most in the housing downturn — particularly California, Florida, Arizona and Nevada — to work through distressed housing inventory and start recovering.

But even within states, the recovery is not monolithic. Most of Maryland is still in a moderating recession, but Bethesda — a suburb of Washington, D.C. — is rebounding, thanks to steady federal employment and a health care boom that's lifting its medical research facilities. And tech mecca San Jose is defying California's broader troubles.

Small cities, which have a disproportionate share of factories, hospitals and universities, are more likely than large ones to be in growth mode. USA TODAY reporters visited five metro areas already on the recovery path, and here's what they found:

Silicon Valley is brightening up
PALO ALTO, Calif. — A year ago, even the downtown here was subdued.
The area, home to Stanford University (http://content.usatoday.com/topics/topic/Organizations/Schools/Stanford+University), the nation's leading venture capitalists and some of the most prestigious office and retail space in Silicon Valley, had seen office vacancies climb to 14%. Retail vacancies had ballooned, too. At Manta Restaurant and Lounge, an upscale Indian-California cuisine restaurant, average bills dropped to $35 from $50, says owner Ashwani Dhawan.

"Everybody was hunkered down," says Randy Gabrielson of real estate firm Cornish & Carey Commercial.

Things have brightened a bit. The vacancy rate for the most expensive office space in downtown has dropped to 8% from 11% a year ago, Gabrielson says. All of that 8% "has activity on it," he adds.

Dhawan says restaurant tabs are still smaller than they used to be. But he's serving more people, and business is up 5% to 10% over last year. Dhawan recently opened another restaurant in downtown Palo Alto, the Slider Bar Cafe. It was packed on a recent Saturday night. But the storefront next to it, once occupied by a jeweler, sat vacant.
"The difference is very visible," says Jon Goldman of Premier Properties Management in Palo Alto. Last year, Goldman didn't lease downtown space to any new start-ups. This year, he's done half a dozen start-up deals.

In previous downturns, high-end Silicon Valley communities such as Palo Alto picked up before other areas, Goldman says.
That may be happening again as signs of recovery sprout here and there in Silicon Valley, which includes Palo Alto near the north and San Jose near the south.

The region's unemployment rate remains high at 12%. But nearly three out of five Silicon Valley CEOs say they plan to hire this year, up from one out of five last year, according to a recent survey of 153 chief executives by the Silicon Valley Leadership Group.

When adjusted for seasonal variations, the region has added non-farm jobs for four months in a row after generally losing jobs the prior 18 months. "It's a nice turnaround," says Ruth Kavanagh of the California Employment Development Department.

Housing is also showing improvement. KB Homehas almost sold out a 40-home development opened late last year in San Jose.
In Santa Clara County, the heart of Silicon Valley, March sales of new and existing homes rose 24% from a year ago, says researcher MDA DataQuick. "We've seen pretty strong demand for several months now. Prices are moving up … in every price range," says Karl Lee, president of the Santa Clara County Association of Realtors.

Recovery is more visible in some pockets of Silicon Valley than others.
Yet economic boosters are hopeful. The number of businesses seeking information about expanding in or relocating to San Jose tripled in the first quarter from a year ago, says Nanci Klein, division manager for the San Jose Office of Economic Development.

The climb back will be long. In the past 2½ years, the Mineta San Jose International Airport has lost 25% of its passenger traffic and a third of its flights. In March, the number of passengers rose a smidge from a year ago.
"We're anxiously waiting to see if it's the beginning of a trend," says spokesman David Vossbrink.
By Julie Schmit

cont. below
http://www.usatoday.com/money/economy/2010-04-26-economic-turnaround_N.htm

BigRedChief
04-27-2010, 06:50 AM
Education and 'green' business power Fort Collins' rebound
FORT COLLINS, Colo. — Backstopped by the region's largest employer — Colorado State University — and a steady stream of college students, cutting-edge "green" companies and federal research dollars, the economy of Fort Collins is swinging back.

Sales tax collections are ticking up, residential and commercial construction is more than double the 2009 level and new restaurants are opening.

Barista Annie Franz says she sees it in the paycheck from her new job at the restaurant Snooze after five months of unemployment. Her boss, Adam Schlegel, says he sees it in the "vibrancy" of the customers packing the new eatery. And Abound Solar spokesman Mark Chen says he sees it in the eyes of the 210 employees his company has hired since the end of 2008 to make low-cost, high-efficiency photovoltaic panels.
Moody's Economy.com classifies Fort Collins, about 65 miles north of Denver, as one of about 200 metro areas nationwide in economic recovery. Moody's cites the city's skilled workforce, relatively lower business costs and an emphasis on "innovation and budding solar energy." Other strengths include the presence of CSU's roughly 6,100 employees, 25,000 students and $312 million in annual research spending.
"There's a mind-set of, 'How can we be cutting edge?' " Gov. Bill Ritter (http://content.usatoday.com/topics/topic/People/Politicians,+Government+Officials,+Strategists/Governors,+Mayors/Bill+Ritter) says of Fort Collins, Colorado's fifth-largest city. "It's a creative class that is spawned by the work that's happening at CSU."
CSU President Tony Frank says Fort Collins' reputation helps the university attract high-quality faculty and students, who then bolster the area's economy through their spending.

"Whatever we do that helps the community really comes back to us as an investment in Colorado State," he says. "It's a very symbiotic relationship."

CSU spun off Abound in January 2007 after professor W.S. Sampath discovered a new way to make solar panels. The Fort Collins company now employs more than 360 people.
Fort Collins increased clean-energy jobs by about 36% from the second quarter of 2006 to the second quarter of 2009, says city CFO Mike Freeman. Those 827 new jobs partly resulted from public-private partnerships created to lure investment in clean-energy start-ups, he says.

Schlegel says he and his brother, Jon, decided to open the third location for their Denver-based restaurants in Fort Collins after seeing the city's "magical" Old Town area and meeting area residents. They hired about 30 workers and opened in mid-April, Schlegel says.

Franz, the barista, says losing her job marketing high-end yoga apparel in Denver in October led to many "frustrating" days, but that snagging a job in Fort Collins improved her fortunes. She started her new job April 1.
"I feel like I'm part of a community again," she says. "I'm active. I'm meeting new people. And I'm making money."
By Trevor Hughes, The (Fort Collins) Coloradoan

Encouraging signs in NYC
NEW YORK — From the Great White Way to Ellis Island, tourists are flocking to New York City, stoking the city's economic engine and helping it rebound from the nation's deep recession.
Hotels are fuller, audiences for Broadway shows are growing, and the crowds at many of the most famous tourist attractions are larger than last year, city officials and industry observers say.

"Tourism is a major driver of New York City's economy, generating hundreds of millions of dollars in tax revenue for the city and employing well over 300,000 New Yorkers," says Andrew Brent, a spokesman for the office of Mayor Michael Bloomberg (http://content.usatoday.com/topics/topic/People/Politicians,+Government+Officials,+Strategists/Governors,+Mayors/Michael+Bloomberg). "It's hard to predict the timing of an economic recovery, but certainly the strength of the city's tourism industry and the recent rise in visitors has and will continue to play a major role."

The number of visitors to the city is expected to grow about 3% this year, to 46.7 million, according to Kimberly Spell, a spokeswoman for NYC & Co., the city's office of tourism. The number of tourists dropped nearly 4% in 2009 from 2008.

Tourism generates about $30 billion a year for New York City, the most popular U.S. destination for international travelers.

Hotel rooms here are close to selling out. More than 81% of rooms were filled in March compared with about 70% in March 2009, according to Smith Travel Research (STR), which tracks such figures. Hotel revenue in March exceeded $450 million, a 21% increase over that month last year.
"We're selling eight out of 10 … rooms on average in New York City," says Jan Freitag, vice president at STR. "So, recession? What recession? … In general, for the first quarter, New York City, which got hit pretty hard in the recession, is well on its way to a nice recovery."

And Broadway is soaring. The fabled theater district broke box office records last season, despite the economic downturn. As of March, it was outpacing last year in both attendance and revenue.

During the first three months of this year, revenue rose more than 4%, and the number of theatergoers increased nearly 2% compared with that time period last year, according to The Broadway League, the trade group for the Broadway industry.

"The theaters were booked with a lot of great shows, (and) tourism is still strong," says Charlotte St. Martin, executive director of The Broadway League.

By Charisse Jones
Huntsville, Ala., takes off
HUNTSVILLE, Ala. — The city that built America's moon rockets is racking up accolades.

Forbes (http://content.usatoday.com/topics/topic/Organizations/Companies/Publishers,+Media,+Music/Forbes+Magazine) magazine just named Huntsville one of the top 10 places for business and careers. It was named America's fourth-strongest building market by BusinessWeek in September, the nation's top midsize city to launch and grow a business by Fortune Small Business magazine in November, and one of the world's top 10 smartest cities by Forbes in December.
The area has one of the USA's best job-growth rates, according to Moody's Economy.com.

"I'm getting very good at ribbon cutting," says Mayor Tommy Battle.
The unemployment rate has fallen to 8.4% after peaking at 8.9% late last year. City sales tax receipts, which were down 3% to 4%, are now off 0.1%, Battle says.

The city plans a new 470-acre office park. Extensive renovations are underway on the art museum and the sports arena. Downtown sidewalks are getting a face lift.

Defense spending is a major reason that Huntsville, home to the Army's Redstone Arsenal (http://content.usatoday.com/topics/topic/Arsenal+F.C) and NASA (http://content.usatoday.com/topics/topic/Organizations/Government+Bodies/NASA)'s Marshall Space Flight Center, is rebounding.
The military is moving nearly 5,000 jobs here by September 2011, a shift that'll eventually generate 10,000 jobs. Redstone and Marshall are the top employers, with more than 32,500 mostly civilian jobs. Redstone awards $32 billion a year in contracts. About $5 billion stays in the area.
Huntsville has diversified its economy. In the late 1970s, military spending accounted for 80% of the local economy. Today, it's about 50%. Fifty Fortune 500 companies are here, says economic development director Joe Vallely.

The main industries are defense, aerospace, advanced manufacturing, information technology and life sciences.
Before 1950, Huntsville was indistinguishable from a hundred other Alabama farm towns.

Then rocket pioneer Wernher von Braun (http://content.usatoday.com/topics/topic/Wernher+von+Braun) and a team of scientists moved to Redstone to build missiles for the Army. He later became Marshall's first director and chief architect of the Saturn V rockets that carried Americans to the moon in 1969.

People here say the von Braun legacy of innovation and research fuels today's success. Huntsville has the USA's highest per-capita concentration of engineers. "You've got this community of smart people, and … they get involved," says Rick Davis (http://content.usatoday.com/topics/topic/People/Politicians,+Government+Officials,+Strategists/Rick+Davis), director of Cummings Research Park.

From 1990 to 2009, metro Huntsville accounted for 24% of Alabama's population growth.

"Once you come here, you see the energy of the place, and it's a very easy place to sell," says David Williams, president of the University of Alabama-Huntsville.

By Larry Copeland
Fort Wayne 'feeling better'
FORT WAYNE, Ind. — The economy must be looking up, John Scheele says: More people are ordering rhubarb pie for dessert at Cindy's Diner, the 15-stool restaurant he owns with his wife, Cindy.

"People are spending a little more and feeling better," he says.
There are other hopeful signs in this city of 248,000.

On May 17, General Motors (http://content.usatoday.com/topics/topic/Organizations/Companies/Manufacturing,+Construction/General+Motors)' Fort Wayne Assembly will start a third shift for the first time in its 24-year history. By May 31, the truck-building plant will employ 3,787, up from 2,487 on Dec. 31.

Some of the new workers were laid off at GM (http://content.usatoday.com/topics/topic/Organizations/Companies/Manufacturing,+Construction/General+Motors) facilities in 25 states.
"It's great for the community. It's great to see the whole nation bouncing back," says plant manager Mike Glinski.

Relief that the plant survived GM's restructuring created "a whole different atmosphere" after a "really awful" recession, says Orval Plumlee, president of United Auto Workers (http://content.usatoday.com/topics/topic/United+Auto+Workers) Local 2209.

This city's diverse manufacturing base insulated it from some of the recession's effects, says Andi Udris, president of the Fort Wayne-Allen County Economic Development Alliance, and its low cost of living makes it an appealing spot now for companies that are consolidating operations.
The metro-area jobless rate was 11.1% in March, but Udris says Allen County attracted about a half-dozen new employers in 2009.

Main Street Venture Fund, an investment group, recently saved 40 jobs when it bought the assets of a company that made electro-mechanical components.

"It's starting to feel like we're going to come out of this," says Main Street President Karen Goldner, a Fort Wayne city council member.
Mike Carpenter, owner of Custom Poly Packaging, says the past three months were "a pleasant surprise" after a tough 2009 that forced him to lay off three employees. His 13 workers, including one temporary employee hired recently, are starting to put in some overtime, he says.
Don Jennings sees optimism in his customers at BitterSweet Gifts. More expensive items are selling, and "People have gotten nicer in the past few months."

BigRedChief
04-27-2010, 01:04 PM
Consumer confidence gets a boost in April
Reading marks the highest level since September 2008
By Anne D'Innocenzio
The Associated Press
updated 11:44 a.m. CT, Tues., April 27, 2010
<SCRIPT language=javascript> function UpdateTimeStamp(pdt) { var n = document.getElementById("udtD"); if(pdt != '' && n && window.DateTime) { var dt = new DateTime(); pdt = dt.T2D(pdt); if(dt.GetTZ(pdt)) {n.innerHTML = dt.D2S(pdt,(('false'.toLowerCase()=='false')?false:true));} } } UpdateTimeStamp('634079834739200000');</SCRIPT>
NEW YORK - Americans' confidence in the economy rose in April to its highest level since September 2008, just as the financial crisis escalated, according to a private research group.

The upbeat reading, combined with bullish earnings reports this week from companies ranging from Whirlpool Corp. to UPS Inc., offers more hope the economic rebound is gathering steam. Meanwhile, a key home price index reported its first annual increase in more than three years, though it's too early to say the housing market is recovering.

Fresh worries, however, came from Europe. The Dow Jones industrial average fell 161.27 points, or 1.4 percent, to 11,043.76 after Standard & Poor's slashed Portugal's and Greece's debt ratings.

The Conference Board, a private research group based in New York, said Tuesday that its Consumer Confidence index increased to 57.9, up from a revised 52.3 in March. The April reading is the highest since September 2008's 61.4. That was when the financial crisis intensified with the collapse of Lehman Brothers, sending confidence into freefall the following month. Economists surveyed by Thomson Reuters were expecting a reading of 53.5.

The index — which measures how shoppers feel about business conditions, the job market and the next six months — had been recovering fitfully since hitting an all-time low of 25.3 in February 2009.

Economists watch the number closely because consumer spending including health care and other major items, accounts for about 70 percent of U.S. economic activity.

April's reading is still far from what's considered healthy. A reading above 90 indicates the economy is on solid footing; above 100 signals strong growth. Still, the monthly survey of consumers showed that consumers' current and short-term concerns about jobs and the overall economy are easing.

One component of the overall index, which assesses how consumers feel now about the economy, rose to 28.6 in April from 25.2 in March. The other component, which measures shoppers' outlook over the next six months, climbed to 77.4 from 70.4.

"Looking ahead, continued job growth will be key in sustaining positive momentum," said Lynn Franco, director for The Conference Board Consumer Research Center.

Economists believe confidence will remain relatively weak for at least another year because companies haven't begun to dramatically ramp up hiring.

"I think it is good to see the (confidence) numbers moving up again, but I don't call it a major change in confidence," said Gary Thayer, chief economist at Wells Fargo Advisors. "But it does reflect a more optimistic view in the job market."

Thayer noted that he still expects an overall modest economic recovery citing both weak and strong pockets. Manufacturing may be showing signs of strengthening, but small businesses, which are typically a big source of hiring, are still struggling as they continue to have a hard time getting credit, he said.

According to the Standard & Poor's/Case-Shiller home price index, home prices in February posted a 0.6 percent increase on a non-seasonally adjusted basis from a year ago, but 11 of the 20 cities in the Standard & Poor's/Case-Shiller home price index showed declines.

"We have this divergence in the economy," Thayer said.

Employers are expected to add 175,000 jobs in April, but economists project unemployment will remain at 9.7 percent. The Labor Department is due to release monthly job figures May 7. Thayer said that companies need to add at least 250,000 jobs monthly in order to reduce the unemployment rate.

First-quarter earnings reports from big manufacturers including Caterpillar Inc. and Whirlpool along with Tuesday's upbeat forecast from UPS are underscoring that consumer demand is strengthening across all types of goods.

Against this economic background, signs of life in consumer spending are sprouting this spring, and stores are primping for a recovery by increasing inventories and re-evaluating their marketing.

Retailers reported a 9 percent increase in sales at stores open at least a year for March, the biggest gain since March 1999, though much of that was a result of an earlier Easter that pushed more spending into March. Sales at stores open at least a year are considered a key indicator of a retailer's health. March's performance marks the fourth consecutive month of sale gains.

The Conference Board survey — based on a random survey of consumers sent to 5,000 households from April 1-20 — showed worries about jobs were easing. Those saying that jobs are "plentiful" increased to 4.8 percent from 4.0 percent, while those saying jobs are "hard to get" decreased to 45.0 from 46.3.

Consumers were also more upbeat about the job outlook. The percentage of consumers anticipating more jobs in the months ahead increased to 18 percent from 14.1 percent,while those anticipating fewer jobs fell.

Copyright 2010 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
<SCRIPT>var url=location.href;var i=url.indexOf('/did/') + 1;if(i==0){i=url.indexOf('/print/1/') + 1;}if(i==0){i=url.indexOf('&print=1');}if(i>0){url = url.substring(0,i);document.write('URL: '+url+' (http://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/'+url+')
');if (typeof FDCPUrl == 'function'){FDCPUrl();}else if(window.print){window.print()}else{alert('To print his page press Ctrl-P on your keyboard \nor choose print from your browser or device after clicking OK');}}</SCRIPT>URL: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/36797902/ns/business-consumer_news/ (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/36797902/ns/business-consumer_news/)
http://msnbcmedia2.msn.com/i/MSNBC/Components/ArtAndPhoto-Fronts/AP_GRAPHICS/AP-CONSUMER-CONF.gif

Silock
04-27-2010, 03:25 PM
Yay, but -210 on the Dow today.

BigRedChief
04-28-2010, 03:21 PM
Unemployment falls in a majority of US cities
Three-quarters report declining or flat unemployment rates
The Associated Press
updated 12:31 p.m. CT, Wed., April 28, 2010
<SCRIPT language=javascript> function UpdateTimeStamp(pdt) { var n = document.getElementById("udtD"); if(pdt != '' && n && window.DateTime) { var dt = new DateTime(); pdt = dt.T2D(pdt); if(dt.GetTZ(pdt)) {n.innerHTML = dt.D2S(pdt,(('false'.toLowerCase()=='false')?false:true));} } } UpdateTimeStamp('634080726958170000');</SCRIPT>
WASHINGTON - Unemployment rates fell or remained level in three-quarters of the 372 largest metropolitan areas, a sign that the economic recovery is widespread.

The Labor Department said Wednesday the jobless rate dropped in 69 percent of metro areas last month from February. It rose in 24 percent of large cities and remained the same in the rest.

That's an improvement from February, when the unemployment rate decreased in 51 percent of metro areas and increased in one-third.
The report follows other recent encouraging news about jobs. Employers added 162,000 jobs in March, the government said earlier this month, the most significant gain in three years.

Still, the growth wasn't enough to bring down the unemployment rate, which remained at 9.7 percent for the third straight month.

The metro unemployment data isn't seasonally adjusted and can be volatile from month to month. Some of the cities with sharp drops last month in unemployment recorded big increases in February. That could reflect the impact of February's massive snowstorms, economists said.
Steven Cochrane, managing director at Moody's Analytics, said Wednesday's report shows employment nationwide is stabilizing.
"The recovery really is spreading broadly across the country," Cochrane said. "I'm not seeing any regional clusters ... that look like they're shifting relative to others."

Year-over-year figures, which cancel out seasonal variations, also show improvement. But they also illustrate how far much of the country has to go to recover from the recession.

The jobless rate dropped in only 41 metro areas in March compared to the previous year, while rising in 321. As recently as December, the unemployment rate fell in only one area compared to a year earlier.
The report shows unemployment is still widespread. Twenty-eight cities reported jobless rates above 15 percent, compared to 29 in February. Fifteen of those cities were in California and five were in Michigan.
Unemployment topped 10 percent in 164 cities last month, down from 187 in both January and February.

Among the 49 cities with a population of 1 million or more, the Detroit metro area had the highest unemployment rate, the department said, at 15.5 percent. The Riverside, Calif. metro area had the second highest, at 15 percent.

The New Orleans metro area had the lowest rate among cities with 1 million or more, at 6 percent, followed by Oklahoma City at 6.1 percent. Both regions have benefited from higher oil prices in recent months. New Orleans' port has seen a jump in international trade.

Copyright 2010 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
<SCRIPT>var url=location.href;var i=url.indexOf('/did/') + 1;if(i==0){i=url.indexOf('/print/1/') + 1;}if(i==0){i=url.indexOf('&print=1');}if(i>0){url = url.substring(0,i);document.write('URL: '+url+' (http://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/'+url+')
');if (typeof FDCPUrl == 'function'){FDCPUrl();}else if(window.print){window.print()}else{alert('To print his page press Ctrl-P on your keyboard \nor choose print from your browser or device after clicking OK');}}</SCRIPT>URL: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/36828601/ns/business-stocks_and_economy/ (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/36828601/ns/business-stocks_and_economy/)

BigRedChief
04-29-2010, 07:55 AM
Foreclosures fall in most of top metro areas
Declines in some big metros reflect U.S. efforts to stem foreclosures
By Julie Haviv
Reuters
updated 6:51 a.m. CT, Thurs., April 29, 2010
<SCRIPT language=javascript> function UpdateTimeStamp(pdt) { var n = document.getElementById("udtD"); if(pdt != '' && n && window.DateTime) { var dt = new DateTime(); pdt = dt.T2D(pdt); if(dt.GetTZ(pdt)) {n.innerHTML = dt.D2S(pdt,(('false'.toLowerCase()=='false')?false:true));} } } UpdateTimeStamp('634081386632070000');</SCRIPT>
NEW YORK - Foreclosure activity fell in 14 of the top 20 U.S. metropolitan areas in the first quarter compared with a year earlier, even though total U.S. foreclosures rose, RealtyTrac said on Thursday.

The declines in some big metro areas, however, reflected government efforts to stem foreclosures and did not indicate that the tide of foreclosures has turned, RealtyTrac said.

The Sun Belt continued to lead in foreclosures, with four Sun Belt states accounting for all of the 20 metropolitan areas with the highest rates in the first quarter, the real estate data company said.

But the majority of those top metro areas, with populations over 200,000, reported decreasing foreclosure activity compared with the first quarter of 2009, RealtyTrac, based in Irvine, California, said.

California accounted for 10 out of the top 20 metro foreclosure rates, followed by Florida with seven, Nevada with two, and Arizona with one, RealtyTrac said in a quarterly report.

Foreclosure activity declined on a year-over-year basis in eight of 10 biggest metro areas.

"The decreasing foreclosure activity in some of the nation's top foreclosure hot spots in the first quarter is largely the result of government intervention and other non-market influences, and not a sure signal that those areas are out of the woods yet when it comes to foreclosures," James J. Saccacio, chief executive of RealtyTrac, said in a statement.

He said a federal government program designed to encourage short sales, which was launched April 5, may have caused delays in the initiation of some foreclosures. In a short sale, a lender agrees to accept a sales price that is less than the amount owed on a mortgage.

RealtyTrac said 77 percent of large U.S. metropolitan areas posted year-over-year increases in foreclosure activity. Foreclosure activity nationwide increased 16 percent from the first quarter of 2009.
Las Vegas continued to post the highest foreclosure rate in the first quarter, with one in 28 housing units receiving a foreclosure filing, or 3.51 percent, 4.9 times the national average.

A total of 28,480 Las Vegas housing units received a foreclosure filing during the quarter, up nearly 13 percent from the previous quarter but down 19 percent from the first quarter of 2009.

Foreclosure activity also spread beyond the Sun Belt, with unemployment quite possibly the biggest driving factor.

Foreclosures are by far one of the biggest threats to the U.S. housing market. Improvement in the housing market bodes well for the U.S. economy, as it points to better demand in the sector where the first signs of the latest recession took root.

Copyright 2010 Reuters. Click for restrictions.
<SCRIPT>var url=location.href;var i=url.indexOf('/did/') + 1;if(i==0){i=url.indexOf('/print/1/') + 1;}if(i==0){i=url.indexOf('&print=1');}if(i>0){url = url.substring(0,i);document.write('URL: '+url+' (http://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/'+url+')
');if (typeof FDCPUrl == 'function'){FDCPUrl();}else if(window.print){window.print()}else{alert('To print his page press Ctrl-P on your keyboard \nor choose print from your browser or device after clicking OK');}}</SCRIPT>URL: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/36844659/ns/business-real_estate/ (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/36844659/ns/business-real_estate/)

BigRedChief
04-29-2010, 08:31 AM
New Jobless Claims Drop by 11,000 to Lowest Level in 4 Months


Associated Press

The number of Americans filing claims for unemployment benefits dropped for a second consecutive week, further evidence that the job market is slowing improving.

WASHINGTON -- The number of Americans filing claims for unemployment benefits dropped for a second consecutive week, further evidence that the job market is slowing improving.

The Labor Department said Thursday that initial jobless benefits dropped by 11,000 to 448,000, the lowest level in four weeks. The new total was slightly higher than economists had expected.
The four-week average for claims edged up slightly to 462,500, still above the level that economists believe signals sustained improvements in the job market.

Claims have been on a rollercoaster in recent weeks, posting sharp increases in the first two weeks of April and then falling for the past two weeks. Part of those swings reflected troubles that the government has in seasonally adjusting the figures around Easter which falls at different times each year.

However, economists said the uneven declines in claims also reflect the fact that the labor market is still struggling to emerge from the country's worst recession since the 1930s.


The unemployment rate has been stuck at 9.7 percent for three consecutive months. Many economists believe that the 10.1 percent jobless rate hit in October may turn out to be the peak for unemployment in this slump but they are not forecasting a rapid improvement given all the headwinds still facing the economy. The economy did add 162,000 jobs in March, the largest increase in three years.

Many analysts believe that the four-week moving average needs to fall below 425,000 to signal sustained job growth. Applications for jobless benefits peaked during the recession at 651,000 in March 2009.

The number of people continuing to claims benefits fell by 18,000 to 4.65 million.

That figure lags the initial claims by one week. It doesn't include millions of people who have used up the regular 26 weeks of benefits typically provided by states and are receiving extended benefits of up to 73 additional weeks paid by the federal government.
About 5.4 million people were receiving extended benefits for the week ending April 10, the latest data available.

The department said that 43 states and territories had declines in claims for the week ending April 17 while 10 states saw increases.
The states with the largest declines were New York, a drop of 21,000 which was attributed to fewer layoffs in the service and transportation industries, and California, which saw claims fall by 15,380.

The states and territories with the largest increases in claims for the week of April 17 were Puerto Rico, up 3,549; Iowa, up 1,606, and Georgia, up 1,412.

There have been some hopeful signs recently in the economy. Many companies are reporting strong first-quarter profits as consumers, who account for 70 percent of the total economy, spend more.
While the profit turnaround has not yet produced a dramatic increase in hiring, it at least provides hope that the worst of the economic slump is over.

Companies in the Standard & Poor's 500 index have reported 76 percent higher operating earnings than a year ago -- on pace to be the biggest year-over-year increase ever, according to S&P analyst Howard Silverblatt. Nearly half the companies in the index have reported earnings so far.

Part of the reason for the big jump is that the economy was hitting the depths of the recession a year ago, making the rebound look more impressive.

Among the winners was Ford Motor Co. which reported a $2.1 billion profit on 15 percent higher revenue for the first quarter this year and said it plans to boost production. Caterpillar Inc. also reversed a loss from a year ago and said demand for its construction and mining equipment is surging.
A number of major corporations have boosted their full-year profit forecasts this month. This week alone, the list includes DuPont Co., Estee Lauder Cos. and Whirlpool Corp.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/04/29/jobless-claims-fall-lowest-level-weeks/

The Mad Crapper
04-29-2010, 04:48 PM
http://radioviceonline.com/uh-oh-schiff-tells-yahoo-the-economy-is-in-worse-shape-not-better/

BigRedChief
04-30-2010, 08:04 AM
http://radioviceonline.com/uh-oh-schiff-tells-yahoo-the-economy-is-in-worse-shape-not-better/ROFL

Economy grows at 3.2% pace in first quarter
Third straight quarter of growth and led by resurgent consumer spending
BREAKING NEWS
By Lucia Mutikani
Reuters
updated 7:38 a.m. CT, Fri., April 30, 2010

<SCRIPT language=javascript> function UpdateTimeStamp(pdt) { var n = document.getElementById("udtD"); if(pdt != '' && n && window.DateTime) { var dt = new DateTime(); pdt = dt.T2D(pdt); if(dt.GetTZ(pdt)) {n.innerHTML = dt.D2S(pdt,(('false'.toLowerCase()=='false')?false:true));} } } UpdateTimeStamp('634082278892970000');</SCRIPT>
WASHINGTON - The U.S. economy grew at a slightly slower-than-expected pace in the first quarter, held back by inventories and exports, but resurgent consumer spending offered evidence of a sustainable recovery, a government report showed on Friday.

Gross domestic product expanded at a 3.2 percent pace, the Commerce Department said in its first estimate -- marking three straight quarters of growth as the economy climbs out of the worst recession since the 1930s.

Analysts polled by Reuters had forecast GDP, which measures total goods and services output within U.S. borders, growing at a 3.4 percent rate in the first three months of 2010 after a 5.6 percent growth pace in the fourth quarter.

Despite the slowdown from the prior quarter, details of the report were fairly upbeat, with consumer spending accelerating at a 3.6 percent rate, more than double the 1.6 percent pace in the fourth quarter. The first-quarter rise was the largest since the first quarter of 2007.

Consumer spending, which normally accounts for 70 percent of U.S. economic activity, added 2.55 percentage points to GDP last quarter, the biggest percentage contribution since the fourth quarter of 2006.
Business inventories increased $31.1 billion in the first quarter as businesses restocked to meet firming domestic demand, the first increase since the first quarter of 2008. Inventories contributed 1.57 percentage points to GDP, less than half the contribution in the last three months of 2009 when businesses became less aggressive in clearing their warehouses.

When businesses slow the rate at which they are liquidating inventories, manufacturers raise production and this boosts GDP. Inventories fell $19.7 billion in the last quarter of 2009.

Excluding inventories the economy expanded at a 1.6 percent rate following a 1`.7 percent pace in the fourth quarter.

Businesses continued to spend on software and equipment, though a bit less vigorously than in the prior quarter. Business investment rose at a 4.1 percent rate after a 5.3 percent pace in the fourth quarter.

New home construction, which showed some hesitancy early this year, was a drag on growth in the first quarter -- after two quarters of gains. Residential investment contracted at a 10.9 percent rate after growing at a 3.8 percent pace in the fourth quarter.

Spending on structures subtracted from GDP for a sixth straight quarter. Export growth slowed sharply to a 5.8 percent pace in the first quarter from a 22.8 percent rate in the prior period, while imports rose at an 8.9 percent rate. That left a trade deficit that chipped off 0.61 percentage point from first-quarter GDP.


Copyright 2010 Reuters. Click for restrictions.
<SCRIPT>var url=location.href;var i=url.indexOf('/did/') + 1;if(i==0){i=url.indexOf('/print/1/') + 1;}if(i==0){i=url.indexOf('&print=1');}if(i>0){url = url.substring(0,i);document.write('URL: '+url+' (http://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/'+url+')
');if (typeof FDCPUrl == 'function'){FDCPUrl();}else if(window.print){window.print()}else{alert('To print his page press Ctrl-P on your keyboard \nor choose print from your browser or device after clicking OK');}}</SCRIPT>URL: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/36867367/ns/business-stocks_and_economy/ (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/36867367/ns/business-stocks_and_economy/)

The Mad Crapper
04-30-2010, 08:31 AM
The not-so-great recovery

The effects of the recession are a long way from over. But the recession is over...:drool:

When GDP began to rise again in June 2009, the U.S. economy kept losing jobs. Since then, 900,000 workers have lost their jobs. Almost three quarters into the recovery, in March, the official unemployment rate was still 9.7%, even though the economy had added 162,000 jobs that month. The unofficial full unemployment rate, the one that includes discouraged workers who have stopped looking for jobs and those who have found part-time work but really want to work full time, actually went up in March, to 16.9%, from 16.8% in February.

And then there are the long-term unemployed. The number of workers out of work for 27 weeks or longer climbed in March to 6.5 million from 6.1 million in February. That means that 44.1% of all the unemployed have been out of work for half a year or more.That's the highest percentage since the government began keeping records in 1948.

The extraordinarily high percentage of long-term unemployed isn't just a feature of this recession. The numbers say long-term unemployment has been rising over the past 10 years and that the recent recession only continues a trend visible in the recession of 2001 as well. One-quarter of the long-term unemployed leave the work force permanently, a Congressional Budget Office study found.

Not that even those of us who are employed are exactly rolling in the green stuff now that the recession is over. Personal income rose just 0.1% in February. Real disposable personal income grew by the same 0.1% in February.

And it's not like our gains in our personal wealth are making up for that lag in income. Sure, stocks are up 80% off the March 2009 bottom, but investors are still looking at a Dow Jones Industrial Average ($INDU) that was at 10,500 a decade ago and stands around 11,000 today. That's a gain of about 5% in 10 years.

http://articles.moneycentral.msn.com/Investing/JubaksJournal/the-recession-is-over-yeah-right.aspx

BigRedChief
04-30-2010, 02:27 PM
http://msnbcmedia.msn.com/i/MSNBC/Components/ArtAndPhoto-Fronts/AP_GRAPHICS/AP-GDP.gif

The Mad Crapper
04-30-2010, 03:40 PM
http://msnbcmedia.msn.com/i/MSNBC/Components/ArtAndPhoto-Fronts/AP_GRAPHICS/AP-GDP.gif

You never tire of having your pants pulled down in front of the girls gym, do you?

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2010/04/30/biden_were_in_a_depression.html

BigRedChief
05-03-2010, 01:53 PM
May 3, 2010, 2:00 pm <!-- date updated --><!-- <abbr class="updated" title="2010-05-03T14:00:18+00:00">— Updated: 2:00 pm</abbr> --><!-- Title -->
New Poll: Economic Uplift


<!-- By line --><ADDRESS class="byline author vcard">By MARJORIE CONNELLY (http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/author/marjorie-connelly/)</ADDRESS><!-- The Content -->A growing number of Americans think the economy is improving and three-quarters of them approve of President Obama’s handling of the country’s economy, according to the latest New York Times/CBS News poll.


Forty-one percent said the economy is getting better, up from 33 percent about a month ago, while 15 percent described the economy as deteriorating. Another 43 percent said the economy was staying about the same; but while 7 percent of that segment believe it’s in good shape, the other 35 percent say it’s in bad condition.

Younger and better educated Americans are more likely to describe the economy as on the mend. Sixty-one percent of Democrats said the economy is getting better, but only 16 percent of Republicans and 38 percent of independents agreed.

Overall, the public is evenly divided on their assessment of Mr. Obama’s management of the economy: 48 percent approve and 47 percent disapprove.

And again, there are strong partisan differences. Democrats overwhelmingly approve of the president’s handling of the economy – 77 percent to 19 percent. Republicans, on the other hand, disapprove – 86 percent, while just 11 percent approve.

Independents are divided: Forty-three percent approve and 49 percent disapprove.

The nationwide telephone poll was conducted April 28 to May 2 with 1,079 adults and has a margin of sampling error of plus or minus three percentage points. More results from this survey will be available after 6:30 p.m.

<!-- end content --><!-- footer -->

vailpass
05-03-2010, 02:00 PM
This thread should be named "Propaganda for obama; I'm not Peeing on Your Shoes, It's Raining Lemonade"

BigRedChief
05-03-2010, 02:07 PM
Spending up, but economic outlook cautious
Manufacturing posts growth; stagnant pay, weak hiring weigh on recovery
By Martin Crutsinger
The Associated Press
updated 12:58 p.m. CT, Mon., May 3, 2010

<SCRIPT language=javascript> function UpdateTimeStamp(pdt) { var n = document.getElementById("udtD"); if(pdt != '' && n && window.DateTime) { var dt = new DateTime(); pdt = dt.T2D(pdt); if(dt.GetTZ(pdt)) {n.innerHTML = dt.D2S(pdt,(('false'.toLowerCase()=='false')?false:true));} } } UpdateTimeStamp('634085063327630000');</SCRIPT>
WASHINGTON - Factories are churning out more goods. Consumers are spending. Government aid is fueling construction activity. But stagnant pay and weak hiring will likely restrain the economic rebound in coming months.
That cautionary picture emerged from a series of economic reports Monday.
Consumers stepped up their spending in March by the largest amount in five months. Yet the increase was financed out of savings. Incomes rose only slightly.

Unless employers boost pay and ramp up hiring, economists say consumer spending will likely taper off and dampen the recovery.

The construction industry remains a concern, too. Industry spending rose 0.2 percent in March, the first increase in five months, Commerce said. But all the strength came from government activity — much of it related to temporary stimulus money that's expected to run out soon. By contrast, construction by the private sector fell to the lowest level in a decade.

One sector that's helping drive the recovery is manufacturing. Factory production in April grew at the fastest pace in nearly six years, according to the Institute for Supply Management, representing purchasing executives. Its manufacturing index rose to 60.4 in April from 59.6 in March — the ninth straight month of growth. A level above 50 indicates expansion.

Companies are rebuilding their inventories as demand for goods rises. New orders, a gauge of future production, jumped to 65.7 from 61.5 in March, according to the report.

The fastest-growing industries were clothing makers and producers of nonmetallic goods such as glass, mineral wool and ceramic products used in construction. Makers of wood products, the petroleum and coal sector, and plastics and rubber manufacturers also reported strong growth.

Unemployment still high
Consumer spending has propelled more production in retail goods. On Friday, clothing maker VF Corp., whose brands include Wrangler, The North Face and Vans, said its sales rose 1 percent to $1.75 billion in the first quarter.
Economists caution that the overall picture is clouded by a weak hiring outlook. A report Friday is expected to show no change in the nation's 9.7 percent unemployment rate.

"The consumer needs job creation and income growth to pick up significantly to maintain the momentum in consumer spending and we look to Friday's employment report for further evidence of slow improvement in labor market conditions," analysts for RDQ Economics wrote Monday in a research report.

The government reported Friday that the broadest measure of economic activity, the gross domestic product, grew at an annual rate of 3.2 percent in the January-March period. That marked the third quarterly increase since last summer. Most economists believe the recession, which began in December 2007, probably ended in either June or July of last year.

The healthy first quarter GDP gain was driven by a big rebound in consumer spending, which powered ahead at an annual rate of 3.6 percent, the best showing in three years. But economists said spending gains of that size can't be maintained without greater income and job growth.

‘New frugality’ may continue
Commerce said consumer spending rose 0.6 percent in March, matching economists' expectations. But personal incomes edged up just 0.3 percent, raising new worries about lackluster income growth. At the same time, the personal savings rate fell to 2.7 percent of after-tax incomes. It's the lowest level since September 2008.
During the housing boom, the annual savings rate had fallen as low as 1.7 percent in 2007. Consumers felt more wealthy as their home values soared and felt less of a need to save. But once housing sales and prices collapsed, helping lead to the recession, Americans began saving more. The savings rate rose to 4.3 percent in 2009, the highest level in a decade.

High unemployment is likely to continue to keep a lid on income growth. Unless businesses boost hiring, households won't be able to support a high level of consumer spending, which accounts for 70 percent of economic activity. That could weaken the economic rebound.


However, consumers have yet to start spending at a level necessary to bring down the unemployment rate. In a new Associated Press Economy Survey, two-thirds of the 44 economists surveyed said they believed the last recession had created a "new frugality" among consumers that will outlive the recession. A desire to save more could also act as a drag on spending going forward.

An inflation gauge tied to consumer spending showed a slight 0.1 percent rise in March and the same 0.1 percent increase excluding food and energy. Over the past 12 months, prices excluding food and energy are up by just 1.3 percent, well within the Federal Reserve's comfort zone for keeping short-term rates at record lows.

Copyright 2010 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
<SCRIPT>var url=location.href;var i=url.indexOf('/did/') + 1;if(i==0){i=url.indexOf('/print/1/') + 1;}if(i==0){i=url.indexOf('&print=1');}if(i>0){url = url.substring(0,i);document.write('URL: '+url+' (http://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/'+url+')
');if (typeof FDCPUrl == 'function'){FDCPUrl();}else if(window.print){window.print()}else{alert('To print his page press Ctrl-P on your keyboard \nor choose print from your browser or device after clicking OK');}}</SCRIPT>URL: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/36911618/ns/business-stocks_and_economy/ (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/36911618/ns/business-stocks_and_economy/)

petegz28
05-03-2010, 02:44 PM
US consumer inflation up two percent

Americans saw prices rise two percent in the year to March according to the Commerce Department's personal consumption expenditures index published on Monday.
The figure, which is closely watched by the Federal Reserve as a sign of broader inflation levels, is approaching the maximum the central bank normally considers sustainable.

Energy and food costs rose 18.7 percent against March 2009, up almost four percentage points compared with February. Without food and energy spending the inflation level remained stable at 1.3 percent.

The Federal Reserve last Wednesday vowed to keep historically low interest rates for an "extended period," amid "subdued" inflation trends.

Pointing to a slightly quickening economic recovery, the Fed said labor and housing markets showed glimmers of improvement and spending had ticked up.

That impression was reinforced Monday by the Commerce Department, which said spending rose for the sixth consecutive month in March, up by 0.6 percent.

Seasonally adjusted figures showed spending, a key driver of the US economy, rose as Americans saved less.



http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=CNG.f4ca4a183df2102e9ad9338f1c9b7c75.171&show_article=1

The Mad Crapper
05-04-2010, 07:46 AM
the White House Office of Management and Budget estimated that at the end of 2010, the national debt will breach the $14-trillion mark. This means that America's sovereign debt will be soon equal to the annual output of our economy. In other words, our national debt will shortly reach 100 percent of GDP.

According to the 2008 Financial Report of the United States Government, which is an official United States government report, the total liabilities of the United States government, including future social security and medicare payments that the U.S. government is already committed to pay out, now exceed 65 TRILLION dollars. This amount is more than the entire GDP of the whole world.


It is now mathematically impossible for the U.S. government to pay off the U.S. national debt. You see, the truth is that the U.S. government now owes more dollars than actually exist. If the U.S. government went out today and took every single penny from every single American bank, business and taxpayer, they still would not be able to pay off the national debt. And if they did that, obviously American society would stop functioning because nobody would have any money to buy or sell anything.
##################################################

Interesting read.

http://www.truthistreason.net/goldman-sachs-obama-the-federal-reserve-al-gore-a-communist-revolutionary-group

dirk digler
05-06-2010, 03:54 PM
Looks like the jobs report is going to be pretty good this month. Hopefully this continues and business really start hiring people again.

NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) -- Three separate jobs reports released Wednesday signaled that the nation's employment picture may finally be brightening, and hinted that a government report due at week's end could show strong gains.

Private-sector employers added jobs in April for the third consecutive month, according to Automatic Data Processing (ADP).

Outplacement firm Challenger, Gray and Christmas said planned job cuts in April dropped to the lowest level in nearly four years.

The reports came ahead of the Labor Department's monthly jobs figures, scheduled for release Friday. The April data are expected to show a gain of 187,000 jobs, compared to an increase of 162,000 jobs in March, with the unemployment rate holding at 9.7%.

ChiTown
05-06-2010, 03:58 PM
Looks like the jobs report is going to be pretty good this month. Hopefully this continues and business really start hiring people again.

If Europe continues to slide, don't count on it.

petegz28
05-06-2010, 06:22 PM
Looks like the jobs report is going to be pretty good this month. Hopefully this continues and business really start hiring people again.

Yeah. The news was out yesterday they are expecting the Census jobs to inflate the number.

BigRedChief
05-07-2010, 07:40 AM
U.S. economy added 290,000 jobs in April
Jobless rate rises to 9.9 percent as size of labor force increased

BREAKING NEWS
By Lucia Mutikani
Reuters
updated 7:35 a.m. CT, Fri., May 7, 2010

<SCRIPT language=javascript> function UpdateTimeStamp(pdt) { var n = document.getElementById("udtD"); if(pdt != '' && n && window.DateTime) { var dt = new DateTime(); pdt = dt.T2D(pdt); if(dt.GetTZ(pdt)) {n.innerHTML = dt.D2S(pdt,(('false'.toLowerCase()=='false')?false:true));} } } UpdateTimeStamp('634088325555230000');</SCRIPT>
WASHINGTON - U.S. nonfarm payrolls grew at the fastest pace in four years in April as private sector employers ramped up hiring, raising the strong possibility that the labor market recovery may be picking up steam.
Employers added 290,000 jobs in April, the Labor Department said on Friday. It revised figures for February and March to show 121,000 more jobs were added than previously thought. The unemployment rate, however, rose to 9.9 percent as the size of the labor force increased.
Payrolls have now risen for four straight months.

Analysts polled by Reuters had expected nonfarm payrolls to rise 200,000 last month and the jobless rate to remain unchanged at 9.7 percent. The median forecast from the 20 most accurate forecasters was for a payrolls increase of 188,000.

Private sector employment increased 231,000, also the largest gain since March 2006, after rising 174,000 in March. Private payrolls have now grown for four months. Census hiring contributed 66,000 jobs.
Stubbornly high unemployment has been a political sore spot for President Barack Obama and his fellow Democrats, even though the job market appears to be slowly on the mend.

About 8.2 million jobs were lost during the recession and economists warn it is likely to take years to regain that lost employment.
U.S. consumers have begun to participate in what has been a manufacturing-led recovery, but job growth is crucial to sustaining that trend.


Last month, manufacturing payrolls increased 44,000 after rising 19,000 in March. Construction employment gained 14,000, rising for a second month and defying expectations of a fall.

Payrolls in the service sector increased 166,000, advancing for a third month. Temporary help hiring increased 26,200, strengthening the jobs recovery theme. Temporary employment is seen as a precursor to full-time jobs. Government payrolls rose 59,000, adding onto the prior month's 56,000 increase.

The average workweek rose to 34.1 hours from 34 hours in March.

Copyright 2010 Reuters. Click for restrictions.
<SCRIPT>var url=location.href;var i=url.indexOf('/did/') + 1;if(i==0){i=url.indexOf('/print/1/') + 1;}if(i==0){i=url.indexOf('&print=1');}if(i>0){url = url.substring(0,i);document.write('URL: '+url+' (http://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/'+url+')
');if (typeof FDCPUrl == 'function'){FDCPUrl();}else if(window.print){window.print()}else{alert('To print his page press Ctrl-P on your keyboard \nor choose print from your browser or device after clicking OK');}}</SCRIPT>URL: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/37014475/ns/business-stocks_and_economy/ (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/37014475/ns/business-stocks_and_economy/)

dirk digler
05-07-2010, 08:04 AM
Adding 231,000 private jobs is a pretty good thing can't be much to bitch at here.

mlyonsd
05-07-2010, 08:07 AM
Adding 231,000 private jobs is a pretty good thing can't be much to bitch at here.

You must have read past the unemployment rate rising to 9.9% part.

The Mad Crapper
05-07-2010, 08:08 AM
Yeah. The news was out yesterday they are expecting the Census jobs to inflate the number.

They keep manipulating the variable size of labor force . The numbers are worse, alot worse.

dirk digler
05-07-2010, 08:18 AM
You must have read past the unemployment rate rising to 9.9% part.

LMAO God some of you guys could shit a million bricks and never be happy.

The jobless rate rose to 9.9 percent as people streamed back into the market looking for work

stevieray
05-07-2010, 08:27 AM
the economy is awesome..the people that work for you earn more than you do!

mlyonsd
05-07-2010, 08:34 AM
LMAO God some of you guys could shit a million bricks and never be happy.

Yeah, you were one of those on here bloviating for a stimulus package last year.

You got it, printed and burned almost a trillion dollars, and a year and a half later unemployment isn't budging.

I understand the game plan is 'Don't set the bar too high', otherwise you might look like a fool.

Brock
05-07-2010, 09:06 AM
LMAO God some of you guys could shit a million bricks and never be happy.

I think you need to read that again.

Otter
05-07-2010, 09:06 AM
LMAO God some of you guys could shit a million bricks and never be happy.

I think having to pass one brick would be painful enough let alone 1 million.

Why does our government keep adding immigrants to the work force when there's a whole slew of Americans that remain unemployed? From bricklayers to java programmers to scientists there's a long list of Americans looking for work.

dirk digler
05-07-2010, 09:12 AM
Yeah, you were one of those on here bloviating for a stimulus package last year.

You got it, printed and burned almost a trillion dollars, and a year and a half later unemployment isn't budging.

I understand the game plan is 'Don't set the bar too high', otherwise you might look like a fool.

All I said was it was positive news and not much to bitch about and then people start bitching. It is good news and it doesn't mean we are anywhere close to being back but it is a step in the right direction.

It was the biggest job monthly growth in 4 years what is not to like?

dirk digler
05-07-2010, 09:13 AM
I think you need to read that again.

What did I read wrong?

mainly because 805,000 jobseekers – perhaps feeling better about their prospects – resumed their searches for work. Many economists have predicted the unemployment rate would rise as people come back into the labor force.

dirk digler
05-07-2010, 09:20 AM
I think having to pass one brick would be painful enough let alone 1 million.

Why does our government keep adding immigrants to the work force when there's a whole slew of Americans that remain unemployed? From bricklayers to java programmers to scientists there's a long list of Americans looking for work.

I agree Otter it is not right that is why we need to fix the immigration problem the right way but that is not going to happen. I have heard both dems and reps\conservatives say the best way is basically to give them amnesty and have them put in the back of the line, pay a fine and back taxes.

BigRedChief
05-07-2010, 09:41 AM
I agree Otter it is not right that is why we need to fix the immigration problem the right way but that is not going to happen. I have heard both dems and reps\conservatives say the best way is basically to give them amnesty and have them put in the back of the line, pay a fine and back taxes.I'm not on board with the amnesty track yet, but if it forces them to pay the back taxes they own while they were here illegally then that makes it a little more palitable. We need to stop providing free medical care, education and tax free living to 11 million people living here illegally. We can't just put 11 million people on buss's back to Mexico. Thats just not going to happen. It's not realistic.

Otter
05-07-2010, 09:44 AM
I agree Otter it is not right that is why we need to fix the immigration problem the right way but that is not going to happen. I have heard both dems and reps\conservatives say the best way is basically to give them amnesty and have them put in the back of the line, pay a fine and back taxes.

Kind of like the same thing they sold us back in 1986 to solve all the illegal immigration problems of the future?

I'm speaking of legal immigration in this instance as well. High tech visas are killing programmers because it's cheaper. Our government sucks.

BigRedChief
05-07-2010, 09:46 AM
Kind of like the same thing they sold us back in 1986 to solve all the illegal immigration problems of the future?

I'm speaking of legal immigration in this instance as well. High tech visas are killing programmers because it's cheaper. Our government sucks.and we give tax breaks to the companies that hire those H1 visa techs. Then the companies got them by the short hairs and treat them like chit and under pay them instead of providing an american worker with that job.

Proving out tax $'s as an incentive to not hire American workers. How fuc%ed up is that?

patteeu
05-07-2010, 09:51 AM
All I said was it was positive news and not much to bitch about and then people start bitching. It is good news and it doesn't mean we are anywhere close to being back but it is a step in the right direction.

It was the biggest job monthly growth in 4 years what is not to like?

What's not to like? How about the fact that we've lost over $4 million jobs since Obama took office?

Brock
05-07-2010, 09:53 AM
What did I read wrong?

I don't know what you read wrong, but if you think there's anything optimistic about that statement, you need to read it again until you understand what it means.

dirk digler
05-07-2010, 09:57 AM
I'm not on board with the amnesty track yet, but if it forces them to pay the back taxes they own while they were here illegally then that makes it a little more palitable. We need to stop providing free medical care, education and tax free living to 11 million people living here illegally. We can't just put 11 million people on buss's back to Mexico. Thats just not going to happen. It's not realistic.

I understand it is not realistic to put them on buses but we should make it hard on them so maybe they will go back on their own.

Kind of like the same thing they sold us back in 1986 to solve all the illegal immigration problems of the future?

I'm speaking of legal immigration in this instance as well. High tech visas are killing programmers because it's cheaper. Our government sucks.

Yep.

What's not to like? How about the fact that we've lost over $4 million jobs since Obama took office?

All I am saying is that the job market is growing again and companies are hiring jobs which is a huge positive in relation to what has been happening since the economic meltdown.

dirk digler
05-07-2010, 09:58 AM
I don't know what you read wrong, but if you think there's anything optimistic about that statement, you need to read it again until you understand what it means.

I am pretty slow Brock I guess I am just missing something.

BigRedChief
05-07-2010, 09:59 AM
What's not to like? How about the fact that we've lost over $4 million jobs since Obama took office?Please look at this chart and explain to me where Obama has cost us 4 million jobs? This doesn't even include the April numbers . Looks like to me he's got it heading in the right direction.
http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/Unemployment%20Chart.JPG

mlyonsd
05-07-2010, 10:05 AM
It was the biggest job monthly growth in 4 years what is not to like?

I pointed it out to you.

dirk digler
05-07-2010, 10:17 AM
http://consumerist.com/2010/05/if-the-economy-added-290000-new-jobs-why-did-the-unemployment-rate-go-up.html

You might have noticed a few headlines this morning about the good jobs news -- 290,000 new jobs were added in March -- coupled with the rather grim realization that the unemployment rate climbed to 9.9%. What's up with that?

The apparent discrepancy comes from the way the unemployment rate is calculated. The Bureau of Labor Statistics counts only active job seekers -- and the government says that 195,000 of the new jobs were filled by people who had simply given up looking for jobs during the recession.

So, the good news is that people who had given up are getting jobs, and the bad news is that a lot of people have given up.


Here's how the BLS defines "unemployed":

Persons are classified as unemployed if they do not have a job, have actively looked for work in the prior 4 weeks, and are currently available for work. Actively looking for work may consist of any of the following activities: * Contacting:
o An employer directly or having a job interview
o A public or private employment agency
o Friends or relatives
o A school or university employment center
* Sending out resumes or filling out applications
* Placing or answering advertisements
* Checking union or professional registers
* Some other means of active job search
Passive methods of job search do not have the potential to result in a job offer and therefore do not qualify as active job search methods. Examples of passive methods include attending a job training program or course, or merely reading about job openings that are posted in newspapers or on the Internet.

Otter
05-07-2010, 10:34 AM
and we give tax breaks to the companies that hire those H1 visa techs. Then the companies got them by the short hairs and treat them like chit and under pay them instead of providing an american worker with that job.

Proving out tax $'s as an incentive to not hire American workers. How fuc%ed up is that?

It's totally fucked but big corporations have most of our government in their pocket. The Programmers Guild website has a lot of good articles on this subject.

The Mad Crapper
05-07-2010, 11:02 AM
290,000 temporary census workers.

Rejoice.

AndChiefs
05-07-2010, 11:22 AM
290,000 temporary census workers.

Rejoice.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100507/ap_on_bi_go_ec_fi/us_economy

The hiring last month of 66,000 temporary government workers to conduct the census added to overall job creation. But private employers — the backbone of the economy — contributed the most: A surprisingly strong 231,000 jobs, the most since March 2006, the Labor Department said Friday.

patteeu
05-07-2010, 11:23 AM
Please look at this chart and explain to me where Obama has cost us 4 million jobs? This doesn't even include the April numbers . Looks like to me he's got it heading in the right direction.
http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/Unemployment%20Chart.JPG

As of January 2010, our economy had lost 4.1 million jobs during Obama's term according to this article (http://www.businessandmedia.org/articles/2010/20100108104806.aspx). As with your unlabeled graph, I don't know what methodology was used to come up with the numbers and the link within the article is currently down.

Looking at data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics for Jan 2009 (http://www.bls.gov/news.release/archives/empsit_02062009.htm) and April 2010 (http://www.bls.gov/news.release/archives/empsit_05072010.htm), it looks like there are 3.6 million more unemployed today than there were in Jan 2009. There are 5.2 million more people who are not employed (unemployed plus not in labor force) than there were then.

If I eyeball the blue lines on your graph, I get approx. 3.2 million, which isn't anything to brag about I'm afraid.

dirk digler
05-07-2010, 11:35 AM
As of January 2010, our economy had lost 4.1 million jobs during Obama's term according to this article (http://www.businessandmedia.org/articles/2010/20100108104806.aspx). As with your unlabeled graph, I don't know what methodology was used to come up with the numbers and the link within the article is currently down.

Looking at data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics for Jan 2009 (http://www.bls.gov/news.release/archives/empsit_02062009.htm) and April 2010 (http://www.bls.gov/news.release/archives/empsit_05072010.htm), it looks like there are 3.6 million more unemployed today than there were in Jan 2009. There are 5.2 million more people who are not employed (unemployed plus not in labor force) than there were then.

If I eyeball the blue lines on your graph, I get approx. 3.2 million, which isn't anything to brag about I'm afraid.

http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/

He uses the official Labor Statistics data

The Mad Crapper
05-07-2010, 11:37 AM
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100507/ap_on_bi_go_ec_fi/us_economy

The hiring last month of 66,000 temporary government workers to conduct the census added to overall job creation. But private employers — the backbone of the economy — contributed the most: A surprisingly strong 231,000 jobs, the most since March 2006, the Labor Department said Friday.

The new jobs, generated by sectors across the economy, are the first sign that the recovery is adding significant numbers of new jobs — even if not enough to absorb the influx of jobseekers.

***

What sectors? Retail?

patteeu
05-07-2010, 11:40 AM
http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/

He uses the official Labor Statistics data

So did I and I believe the article I linked did too although the link to BLS was down. The source of the data doesn't fully explain the methodology.

The Mad Crapper
05-07-2010, 11:41 AM
So did I.

The numbers are arbitrary. How does the BLS know what the underemployment rate is? They put it at 17%.

How do you tangibly measure that? YOu can't.

The Mad Crapper
05-07-2010, 11:42 AM
So did I and I believe the article I linked did too although the link to BLS was down. The source of the data doesn't fully explain the methodology.

Exactly.

:thumb:

dirk digler
05-07-2010, 11:45 AM
So did I and I believe the article I linked did too although the link to BLS was down. The source of the data doesn't fully explain the methodology.

It is not much to explain.

showing monthly job losses since the start of the Great Recession

patteeu
05-07-2010, 11:51 AM
It is not much to explain.

Then explain to me why BRC's chart doesn't match my numbers or the numbers in the article I linked.

AndChiefs
05-07-2010, 11:57 AM
The new jobs, generated by sectors across the economy, are the first sign that the recovery is adding significant numbers of new jobs — even if not enough to absorb the influx of jobseekers.

***

What sectors? Retail?

You could find this yourself if you tried but...

http://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.nr0.htm

Establishment Survey Data

In April, nonfarm payroll employment rose by 290,000. Sizable employment gains oc-
curred in manufacturing, professional and business services, health care, and in
leisure and hospitality. Federal government employment increased due to the hiring
of temporary workers for Census 2010. Since December, nonfarm payroll employment
has expanded by 573,000, with 483,000 jobs added in the private sector. The vast
majority of job growth occurred during the last 2 months. (See table B-1.)

Manufacturing added 44,000 jobs in April. Since December, factory employment has
risen by 101,000. Over the month, gains occurred in several durable goods indus-
tries, including fabricated metals (9,000) and machinery (7,000). Employment also
grew in nondurable goods manufacturing (14,000).

Mining added 7,000 jobs in April, with most of the increase in support activities
for mining. Since last October, mining has added 39,000 jobs.

In April, construction employment edged up (14,000), following an increase of 26,000
in March. Over the month, nonresidential building and heavy construction added 9,000
jobs each.

Employment in professional and business services rose by 80,000 in April. Temporary
help services continued to add jobs (26,000); employment in this industry has in-
creased by 330,000 since September 2009. Employment also rose over the month in ser-
vices to buildings and dwellings (23,000) and in computer systems design (7,000).

In April, health care employment grew by 20,000, including a gain of 6,000 in hospi-
tals. Over the past year, health care employment has increased by 244,000.

Employment rose by 45,000 in leisure and hospitality over the month. Much of this
increase occurred in accommodation and food services, which added 29,000 jobs. Food
services employment has risen by 84,000 over the past 4 months, while accommodation
has added 18,000 jobs over the past 3 months.

Federal government employment was up in April, reflecting the hiring of 66,000 tem-
porary workers for the decennial census.

Over the month, employment changed little in wholesale trade, retail trade, informa-
tion, and financial activities.

Employment in transportation and warehousing fell by 20,000 in April, reflecting a
large decline in courier and messenger services.

In April, the average workweek for all employees on private nonfarm payrolls increased
by 0.1 hour to 34.1 hours. The manufacturing workweek for all employees increased by
0.2 hour for the second straight month to 40.1 hours, and factory overtime was up by
0.1 hour over the month. The average workweek for production and nonsupervisory em-
ployees on private nonfarm payrolls increased by 0.1 hour to 33.4 hours in April.
(See tables B-2 and B-7.)

Average hourly earnings of all employees in the private nonfarm sector increased by
1 cent to $22.47 in April. Over the past 12 months, average hourly earnings have in-
creased by 1.6 percent. In April, average hourly earnings of private-sector production
and nonsupervisory employees increased by 5 cents to $18.96. (See tables B-3 and B-8.)

The change in total nonfarm payroll employment for February was revised from -14,000
to +39,000, and the change for March was revised from 162,000 to 230,000.

The Mad Crapper
05-07-2010, 12:07 PM
You could find this yourself if you tried but...

http://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.nr0.htm

Establishment Survey Data

In April, nonfarm payroll employment rose by 290,000. Sizable employment gains oc-
curred in manufacturing, professional and business services, health care, and in
leisure and hospitality. Federal government employment increased due to the hiring
of temporary workers for Census 2010. Since December, nonfarm payroll employment
has expanded by 573,000, with 483,000 jobs added in the private sector. The vast
majority of job growth occurred during the last 2 months. (See table B-1.)

Manufacturing added 44,000 jobs in April. Since December, factory employment has
risen by 101,000. Over the month, gains occurred in several durable goods indus-
tries, including fabricated metals (9,000) and machinery (7,000). Employment also
grew in nondurable goods manufacturing (14,000).

Mining added 7,000 jobs in April, with most of the increase in support activities
for mining. Since last October, mining has added 39,000 jobs.

In April, construction employment edged up (14,000), following an increase of 26,000
in March. Over the month, nonresidential building and heavy construction added 9,000
jobs each.

increase occurred in accommodation and food services, which added 29,000 jobs. Food
services employment has risen by 84,000 over the past 4 months, while accommodation
has added 18,000 jobs over the past 3 months.

Federal government employment was up in April, reflecting the hiring of 66,000 tem-
porary workers for the decennial census.

Over the month, employment changed little in wholesale trade, retail trade, informa-
tion, and financial activities.

Employment in transportation and warehousing fell by 20,000 in April, reflecting a
large decline in courier and messenger services.

In April, the average workweek for all employees on private nonfarm payrolls increased
by 0.1 hour to 34.1 hours. The manufacturing workweek for all employees increased by
0.2 hour for the second straight month to 40.1 hours, and factory overtime was up by
0.1 hour over the month. The average workweek for production and nonsupervisory em-
ployees on private nonfarm payrolls increased by 0.1 hour to 33.4 hours in April.
(See tables B-2 and B-7.)

Average hourly earnings of all employees in the private nonfarm sector increased by
1 cent to $22.47 in April. Over the past 12 months, average hourly earnings have in-
creased by 1.6 percent. In April, average hourly earnings of private-sector production
and nonsupervisory employees increased by 5 cents to $18.96. (See tables B-3 and B-8.)

The change in total nonfarm payroll employment for February was revised from -14,000
to +39,000, and the change for March was revised from 162,000 to 230,000.

Employment in professional and business services rose by 80,000 in April. Temporary help services continued to add jobs (26,000); employment in this industry has increased by 330,000 since September 2009. Employment also rose over the month in services to buildings and dwellings (23,000Employment rose by 45,000 in leisure and hospitality over the month.


129,000 shit jobs. And I bet half of them are done by illegals.

dirk digler
05-07-2010, 12:55 PM
Then explain to me why BRC's chart doesn't match my numbers or the numbers in the article I linked.

All this graph is doing is showing how many jobs were lost each month that is it.

ie Jan 2009 we lost over 700,000 jobs in that month alone.

The Obama campaign has a very similar graph.

http://my.barackobama.com/page/content/recoveryanniversary/

http://www.barackobama.com/images/issues/economy/jobs_graph_large_feb10.gif

Heck I can even understand this

BigRedChief
05-07-2010, 01:05 PM
As of January 2010, our economy had lost 4.1 million jobs during Obama's term according to this article (http://www.businessandmedia.org/articles/2010/20100108104806.aspx). As with your unlabeled graph, I don't know what methodology was used to come up with the numbers and the link within the article is currently down.

Looking at data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics for Jan 2009 (http://www.bls.gov/news.release/archives/empsit_02062009.htm) and April 2010 (http://www.bls.gov/news.release/archives/empsit_05072010.htm), it looks like there are 3.6 million more unemployed today than there were in Jan 2009. There are 5.2 million more people who are not employed (unemployed plus not in labor force) than there were then.

If I eyeball the blue lines on your graph, I get approx. 3.2 million, which isn't anything to brag about I'm afraid.jeeezzz comeon your a smart guy. We were losing 700,000 jobs a month when Obama took office. You really expected a magic wand from Obama the next month to start producing jobs? No matter how you slice it, dice it, crunch the numbers etc. the job picture in May 2010 is much better than January 2009 when Obama entered office.

Jobs are starting to come back. Just look at our little piece of the world here at the Planet, its unscientific, but you are seeing I got a job threads, not add me to the unemployed list threads. It's going to take a while. "jobs are a lagging indicator" may be a cliche but its also true after every recession that we have endured.

BigRedChief
05-07-2010, 01:07 PM
He uses the official Labor Statistics dataCorrect. Official graph. Not off the Olberman or Obama site. I guess they though it could be easily dismiised if it were.

patteeu
05-07-2010, 02:28 PM
jeeezzz comeon your a smart guy. We were losing 700,000 jobs a month when Obama took office. You really expected a magic wand from Obama the next month to start producing jobs? No matter how you slice it, dice it, crunch the numbers etc. the job picture in May 2010 is much better than January 2009 when Obama entered office.

Jobs are starting to come back. Just look at our little piece of the world here at the Planet, its unscientific, but you are seeing I got a job threads, not add me to the unemployed list threads. It's going to take a while. "jobs are a lagging indicator" may be a cliche but its also true after every recession that we have endured.

Every job that's lost is harder to lose than the one before it. Most of those red jobs lost were companies getting rid of superfluous employees and tightening their ship. The blue jobs lost are companies cutting themselves to the bone and sometimes just going under altogether because desperate times require desperate measures. No way do I count a job created after 4 million have been lost as a victory although it's certainly better than an additional job lost.

I think it's great if jobs are coming back. Wake me up when they get back to the level they were at when Obama took the reins and then we can start counting "jobs created". With the number of jobs lost at the tail end of the Bush administration, that should give him plenty of room to grow.

BigRedChief
05-07-2010, 02:32 PM
Every job that's lost is harder to lose than the one before it. Most of those red jobs lost were companies getting rid of superfluous employees and tightening their ship. The blue jobs lost are companies cutting themselves to the bone and sometimes just going under altogether because desperate times require desperate measures. No way do I count a job created after 4 million have been lost as a victory although it's certainly better than an additional job lost.

I think it's great if jobs are coming back. Wake me up when they get back to the level they were at when Obama took the reins and then we can start counting "jobs created". With the number of jobs lost at the tail end of the Bush administration, that should give him plenty of room to grow.So the job loss's under Bush was jsut belt tightening by businesses and the job loss's under Obama were because of him. Okay, got it. :doh!:

patteeu
05-07-2010, 02:36 PM
All this graph is doing is showing how many jobs were lost each month that is it.

ie Jan 2009 we lost over 700,000 jobs in that month alone.

The Obama campaign has a very similar graph.

Yes, I understand what the graph purports to do. Even if we ignore the fact that Obama took office before the end of January and attribute that entire month to Bush as the graph maker did, we still end up with ~4 million jobs lost. Add it up yourself.

patteeu
05-07-2010, 02:43 PM
So the job loss's under Bush was jsut belt tightening by businesses and the job loss's under Obama were because of him. Okay, got it. :doh!:

I didn't say "because of" anyone. It's your graph that seeks to allocate the losses to one president or another, not me. Put your thinking cap on, BRC. When a company first experiences financial distress and realizes they need to lay people off, what do they do? They get rid of dead wood, under-utilized employees, and people working for their least productive components. If that turns out to not be enough, the layoff ax starts falling on the guys the company held on to initially because they were more critical to the bottom line and in some cases, the company just ceases operations altogether. So yes, the earlier job losses were generally belt tightening and the later losses were generally more difficult cuts.

Disclaimer: Obviously I'm generalizing so I'm not saying that any particular person who was laid off in 2008 is less valuable than everyone who was laid off in 2009.

BigRedChief
05-07-2010, 02:45 PM
I didn't say "because of" anyone. It's your graph that seeks to allocate the losses to one president or another, not me. Put your thinking cap on, BRC. When a company first experiences financial distress and realizes they need to lay people off, what do they do? They get rid of dead wood, under-utilized employees, and people working for their least productive components. If that turns out to not be enough, the layoff ax starts falling on the guys the company held on to initially because they were more critical to the bottom line and in some cases, the company just ceases operations altogether. So yes, the earlier job losses were generally belt tightening and the later losses were generally more difficult cuts.

Disclaimer: Obviously I'm generalizing so I'm not saying that any particular person who was laid off in 2008 is less valuable than everyone who was laid off in 2009.
Your political feeling and love of all things Bush/Cheney is clouding your judgement.

Disclaimer: Obviously I'm generalizing so I'm not saying that any particular person who was laid off in 2008 is less valuable than everyone who was laid off in 2009.ROFL

mlyonsd
05-07-2010, 02:51 PM
Every job that's lost is harder to lose than the one before it. Most of those red jobs lost were companies getting rid of superfluous employees and tightening their ship. The blue jobs lost are companies cutting themselves to the bone and sometimes just going under altogether because desperate times require desperate measures. No way do I count a job created after 4 million have been lost as a victory although it's certainly better than an additional job lost.

I think it's great if jobs are coming back. Wake me up when they get back to the level they were at when Obama took the reins and then we can start counting "jobs created". With the number of jobs lost at the tail end of the Bush administration, that should give him plenty of room to grow.

You're way more generous than I am. When Obama campaigned on how bad Bush handled the economy, how evil Wall Street was and needed to be regulated, and how democrats were going to step in, print up a bunch of money and fix things, I assumed that meant unemployment would be just as low or better as when Bush was in office. Not at the end but at it's lowest point.

Until then nothing is 'fixed'.

BigRedChief
05-07-2010, 02:55 PM
You're way more generous than I am. When Obama campaigned on how bad Bush handled the economy, how evil Wall Street was and needed to be regulated, and how democrats were going to step in, print up a bunch of money and fix things, I assumed that meant unemployment would be just as low or better as when Bush was in office. Not at the end but at it's lowest point.

Until then nothing is 'fixed'.
Welll then don't expect it to ever be "fixed". Regardless of who occupies the Oval Office. Those days are gone forever.

patteeu
05-07-2010, 03:07 PM
You're way more generous than I am. When Obama campaigned on how bad Bush handled the economy, how evil Wall Street was and needed to be regulated, and how democrats were going to step in, print up a bunch of money and fix things, I assumed that meant unemployment would be just as low or better as when Bush was in office. Not at the end but at it's lowest point.

Until then nothing is 'fixed'.

That's an excellent point. I think he's already failed on that count. I doubt he can even get us back to Jan. 19, 2009, but I have no doubt that BRC and dirk will be calling for a ticker tape parade in his honor anyway.

The Mad Crapper
05-07-2010, 03:11 PM
Remember when the unemployment rate was 5%-6%? And every report was prefaced by the MSM with "But they are all lowpaying jobs" because Bush was president. That went on for years. Now the unemployment rate is 10% but since B.O. is president this is wonderful news.

It must be Friday.

patteeu
05-07-2010, 03:17 PM
Remember when the unemployment rate was 5%-6%? And every report was prefaced by the MSM with "But they are all lowpaying jobs" because Bush was president. That went on for years. Now the unemployment rate is 10% but since B.O. is president this is wonderful news.

It must be Friday.

Good reminder.

The Mad Crapper
05-07-2010, 03:26 PM
And of course, the numbers will be projected downward on Monday, and the headline will include the word "unexpectedly".

:ZZZ:

This O-bot shit is so played out.

BigRedChief
05-07-2010, 03:29 PM
That's an excellent point. I think he's already failed on that count.
Yeah going from losing 700,000 jobs a month to the biggest increase in jobs in over 4 frigging years = fail. :shake:

Nothing will satisfy you guys, that much is clear. Your political views are clouding your economic judgement.

The Mad Crapper
05-07-2010, 03:33 PM
Yeah going from losing 700,000 jobs a month to the biggest increase in jobs in over 4 frigging years = fail. :shake:

Nothing will satisfy you guys, that much is clear. Your political views are clouding your economic judgement.

Remember when the unemployment rate was 5-6%? And every report was prefaced by the MSM with "But they are all lowpaying jobs" because Bush was president? That went on for years. And you were probably leading the parade.

It's played out.

dirk digler
05-07-2010, 03:38 PM
Yes, I understand what the graph purports to do. Even if we ignore the fact that Obama took office before the end of January and attribute that entire month to Bush as the graph maker did, we still end up with ~4 million jobs lost. Add it up yourself.

I think you are confused. Hey look I made my own graph and wow it looks really really similiar to this guys. Man this was hard

<table style="border-collapse: collapse; width: 96pt;" border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" width="128"><col style="width: 48pt;" span="2" width="64"> <tbody><tr style="height: 15pt;" height="20"> <td class="xl63" style="height: 15pt; width: 48pt;" align="right" height="20" width="64">Jan-08</td> <td style="width: 48pt;" align="right" width="64">-72000</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 15pt;" height="20"> <td class="xl63" style="height: 15pt;" align="right" height="20">Feb-08</td> <td align="right">-144000</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 15pt;" height="20"> <td class="xl63" style="height: 15pt;" align="right" height="20">Mar-08</td> <td class="xl64" align="right">-122,000</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 15pt;" height="20"> <td class="xl63" style="height: 15pt;" align="right" height="20">Apr-08</td> <td align="right">-160000</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 15pt;" height="20"> <td class="xl63" style="height: 15pt;" align="right" height="20">May-08</td> <td align="right">-137000</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 15pt;" height="20"> <td class="xl63" style="height: 15pt;" align="right" height="20">Jun-08</td> <td align="right">-161000</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 15pt;" height="20"> <td class="xl63" style="height: 15pt;" align="right" height="20">Jul-08</td> <td align="right">-128000</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 15pt;" height="20"> <td class="xl63" style="height: 15pt;" align="right" height="20">Aug-08</td> <td align="right">-175000</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 15pt;" height="20"> <td class="xl63" style="height: 15pt;" align="right" height="20">Sep-08</td> <td align="right">-321000</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 15pt;" height="20"> <td class="xl63" style="height: 15pt;" align="right" height="20">Oct-08</td> <td align="right">-380000</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 15pt;" height="20"> <td class="xl63" style="height: 15pt;" align="right" height="20">Nov-08</td> <td align="right">-597000</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 15pt;" height="20"> <td class="xl63" style="height: 15pt;" align="right" height="20">Dec-08</td> <td align="right">-577000</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 15pt;" height="20"> <td class="xl63" style="height: 15pt;" align="right" height="20">Jan-09</td> <td align="right">-598000</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 15pt;" height="20"> <td class="xl63" style="height: 15pt;" align="right" height="20">Feb-09</td> <td align="right">-651000</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 15pt;" height="20"> <td class="xl63" style="height: 15pt;" align="right" height="20">Mar-09</td> <td align="right">-663000</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 15pt;" height="20"> <td class="xl63" style="height: 15pt;" align="right" height="20">Apr-09</td> <td align="right">-539000</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 15pt;" height="20"> <td class="xl63" style="height: 15pt;" align="right" height="20">May-09</td> <td align="right">-345000</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 15pt;" height="20"> <td class="xl63" style="height: 15pt;" align="right" height="20">Jun-09</td> <td align="right">-467000</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 15pt;" height="20"> <td class="xl63" style="height: 15pt;" align="right" height="20">Jul-09</td> <td align="right">-247000</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 15pt;" height="20"> <td class="xl63" style="height: 15pt;" align="right" height="20">Aug-09</td> <td align="right">-154000</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 15pt;" height="20"> <td class="xl63" style="height: 15pt;" align="right" height="20">Sep-09</td> <td align="right">-263000</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 15pt;" height="20"> <td class="xl63" style="height: 15pt;" align="right" height="20">Oct-09</td> <td class="xl64" align="right">-190,000</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 15pt;" height="20"> <td class="xl63" style="height: 15pt;" align="right" height="20">Nov-09</td> <td align="right">-11000</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 15pt;" height="20"> <td class="xl63" style="height: 15pt;" align="right" height="20">Dec-09</td> <td align="right">-85000</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 15pt;" height="20"> <td class="xl63" style="height: 15pt;" align="right" height="20">Jan-10</td> <td align="right">-60000</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 15pt;" height="20"> <td class="xl63" style="height: 15pt;" align="right" height="20">Feb-10</td> <td align="right">-14000</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 15pt;" height="20"> <td class="xl63" style="height: 15pt;" align="right" height="20">Mar-10</td> <td align="right">162000</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 15pt;" height="20"> <td class="xl63" style="height: 15pt;" align="right" height="20">Apr-10</td> <td class="xl64" align="right">290,000
</td> </tr> </tbody></table>

dirk digler
05-07-2010, 03:39 PM
Hey look based on the numbers this is how it has played out

Bush -3,572,000

Obama -3,237,000

:p

The Mad Crapper
05-07-2010, 03:44 PM
10% unemployment = good news.

yeah, if you're an O-bot. :drool:

Chief Henry
05-07-2010, 03:51 PM
Remember when the unemployment rate was 5%-6%? And every report was prefaced by the MSM with "But they are all lowpaying jobs" because Bush was president. That went on for years. Now the unemployment rate is 10% but since B.O. is president this is wonderful news.

It must be Friday.

Some have forgotten, but not all.

The Mad Crapper
05-07-2010, 03:53 PM
Some have forgotten, but not all.

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_orkXxp0bhEA/S-RP3pvoKmI/AAAAAAAAdKg/Wq_4F663t8E/s400/100507-unemp.jpg

patteeu
05-07-2010, 03:55 PM
Yeah going from losing 700,000 jobs a month to the biggest increase in jobs in over 4 frigging years = fail. :shake:

Nothing will satisfy you guys, that much is clear. Your political views are clouding your economic judgement.

Before gaining a few hundred thousand jobs, ~4 million were lost on his watch. Nothing to brag about here. You're trying to spin an elephant into a peacock. It's just not going to happen.

patteeu
05-07-2010, 04:01 PM
I think you are confused. Hey look I made my own graph and wow it looks really really similiar to this guys. Man this was hard

<table style="border-collapse: collapse; width: 96pt;" border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" width="128"><col style="width: 48pt;" span="2" width="64"> <tbody><tr style="height: 15pt;" height="20"> <td class="xl63" style="height: 15pt; width: 48pt;" align="right" height="20" width="64">Jan-08</td> <td style="width: 48pt;" align="right" width="64">-72000</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 15pt;" height="20"> <td class="xl63" style="height: 15pt;" align="right" height="20">Feb-08</td> <td align="right">-144000</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 15pt;" height="20"> <td class="xl63" style="height: 15pt;" align="right" height="20">Mar-08</td> <td class="xl64" align="right">-122,000</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 15pt;" height="20"> <td class="xl63" style="height: 15pt;" align="right" height="20">Apr-08</td> <td align="right">-160000</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 15pt;" height="20"> <td class="xl63" style="height: 15pt;" align="right" height="20">May-08</td> <td align="right">-137000</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 15pt;" height="20"> <td class="xl63" style="height: 15pt;" align="right" height="20">Jun-08</td> <td align="right">-161000</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 15pt;" height="20"> <td class="xl63" style="height: 15pt;" align="right" height="20">Jul-08</td> <td align="right">-128000</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 15pt;" height="20"> <td class="xl63" style="height: 15pt;" align="right" height="20">Aug-08</td> <td align="right">-175000</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 15pt;" height="20"> <td class="xl63" style="height: 15pt;" align="right" height="20">Sep-08</td> <td align="right">-321000</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 15pt;" height="20"> <td class="xl63" style="height: 15pt;" align="right" height="20">Oct-08</td> <td align="right">-380000</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 15pt;" height="20"> <td class="xl63" style="height: 15pt;" align="right" height="20">Nov-08</td> <td align="right">-597000</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 15pt;" height="20"> <td class="xl63" style="height: 15pt;" align="right" height="20">Dec-08</td> <td align="right">-577000</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 15pt;" height="20"> <td class="xl63" style="height: 15pt;" align="right" height="20">Jan-09</td> <td align="right">-598000</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 15pt;" height="20"> <td class="xl63" style="height: 15pt;" align="right" height="20">Feb-09</td> <td align="right">-651000</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 15pt;" height="20"> <td class="xl63" style="height: 15pt;" align="right" height="20">Mar-09</td> <td align="right">-663000</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 15pt;" height="20"> <td class="xl63" style="height: 15pt;" align="right" height="20">Apr-09</td> <td align="right">-539000</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 15pt;" height="20"> <td class="xl63" style="height: 15pt;" align="right" height="20">May-09</td> <td align="right">-345000</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 15pt;" height="20"> <td class="xl63" style="height: 15pt;" align="right" height="20">Jun-09</td> <td align="right">-467000</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 15pt;" height="20"> <td class="xl63" style="height: 15pt;" align="right" height="20">Jul-09</td> <td align="right">-247000</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 15pt;" height="20"> <td class="xl63" style="height: 15pt;" align="right" height="20">Aug-09</td> <td align="right">-154000</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 15pt;" height="20"> <td class="xl63" style="height: 15pt;" align="right" height="20">Sep-09</td> <td align="right">-263000</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 15pt;" height="20"> <td class="xl63" style="height: 15pt;" align="right" height="20">Oct-09</td> <td class="xl64" align="right">-190,000</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 15pt;" height="20"> <td class="xl63" style="height: 15pt;" align="right" height="20">Nov-09</td> <td align="right">-11000</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 15pt;" height="20"> <td class="xl63" style="height: 15pt;" align="right" height="20">Dec-09</td> <td align="right">-85000</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 15pt;" height="20"> <td class="xl63" style="height: 15pt;" align="right" height="20">Jan-10</td> <td align="right">-60000</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 15pt;" height="20"> <td class="xl63" style="height: 15pt;" align="right" height="20">Feb-10</td> <td align="right">-14000</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 15pt;" height="20"> <td class="xl63" style="height: 15pt;" align="right" height="20">Mar-10</td> <td align="right">162000</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 15pt;" height="20"> <td class="xl63" style="height: 15pt;" align="right" height="20">Apr-10</td> <td class="xl64" align="right">290,000
</td> </tr> </tbody></table>

And what was I wrong about? Using your numbers (which don't match either your graph or BRC's, BTW), and ignoring Obama's first couple of weeks in office (which would only make the picture worse for him), I still see 3.7 million lost jobs before the gains of the last couple months.

Chief Faithful
05-07-2010, 04:02 PM
Before gaining a few hundred thousand jobs, ~4 million were lost on his watch. Nothing to brag about here. You're trying to spin an elephant into a peacock. It's just not going to happen.

You forget the messiah saved us from losing even more jobs with his stimulus bill. And now, thanks to the messiah's efforts, the Administration is saying we can expect the current unemployment number to remain "stable" for an "extended" period. We just don't realize how bad an economy he inherited.

patteeu
05-07-2010, 04:03 PM
Hey look based on the numbers this is how it has played out

Bush -3,572,000

Obama -3,237,000

:p

See post 225.

dirk digler
05-07-2010, 04:09 PM
And what was I wrong about? Using your numbers (which don't match either your graph or BRC's, BTW), and ignoring Obama's first couple of weeks in office (which would only make the picture worse for him), I still see 3.7 million lost jobs before the gains of the last couple months.

It matches up close enough the guy goes back and does the adjusted number I just took the reported number.

LMAO Of course you don't want to count the gains LMAO That is what an ideologue does :p

patteeu
05-07-2010, 04:19 PM
It matches up close enough the guy goes back and does the adjusted number I just took the reported number.

LMAO Of course you don't want to count the gains LMAO That is what an ideologue does :p

I've been consistent throughout this thread. My point in bringing up the 4 million jobs lost (3.7 million according to your numbers) was that a tiny number of subsequent job gains do not merit much cheering in the context of the preceding losses. It wouldn't make any sense to count the recent gains, but I clearly acknowledged them.

It's really you and the other O-bots who want us to forget about the context in which these gains have been made. I guess that makes you an ideologue (negative connotation), huh?

BTW, there are 3 different sets of numbers. BRC's graph, your graph, and your numbers. Are they based on two different revisions?

chiefsnorth
05-07-2010, 04:25 PM
only in this new America do people spin the loss of 4 million jobs as a positive. He talked big about the economy but as it's plain to see, he is clueless.

He only cares about his ideological agenda
Posted via Mobile Device

dirk digler
05-07-2010, 04:28 PM
I've been consistent throughout this thread. My point in bringing up the 4 million jobs lost (3.7 million according to your numbers) was that a tiny number of subsequent job gains do not merit much cheering in the context of the preceding losses. It wouldn't make any sense to count the recent gains, but I clearly acknowledged them.

It's really you and the other O-bots who want us to forget about the context in which these gains have been made. I guess that makes you an ideologue (negative connotation), huh?

BTW, there are 3 different sets of numbers. BRC's graph, your graph, and your numbers. Are they based on two different revisions?

From my POV this wasn't about Obama it was about being happy that people are starting to go back to work I could care less who the POTUS was. There are people on this board that are starting to go back to work, I have friends that have been unemployed for over a year that just got jobs, and I really really hope pete gets a job soon. It is being happy that we might be turning a corner and going in a positive direction. I just don't get why people can't be a little positive about this. But whatever.

As you probably know the Labor Numbers are released the first of each month and then they are adjusted later on. The guy that does the graph BRC's used goes back each month and edits and uses the adjusted number. For the most part I took the reported number unless I had the adjusted number.

Oh and just on a personal note my gf\fiancee graduates this June from College and I really want her to get a job so she can support me. :D

redsurfer11
05-07-2010, 04:35 PM
All this graph is doing is showing how many jobs were lost each month that is it.

ie Jan 2009 we lost over 700,000 jobs in that month alone.

The Obama campaign has a very similar graph.

http://my.barackobama.com/page/content/recoveryanniversary/

http://www.barackobama.com/images/issues/economy/jobs_graph_large_feb10.gif

Heck I can even understand this

Look at the graph from when Obama took the lead in the Democratic primarys in Feb 2008. Shit went downhill from that moment.
Heck I can even understand that.

The Mad Crapper
05-07-2010, 04:35 PM
only in this new America do people spin the loss of 4 million jobs as a positive. He talked big about the economy but as it's plain to see, he is clueless.

He only cares about his ideological agenda
Posted via Mobile Device

The economy was bad a year and a half ago, and B.O. has only made it worse.

KC native
05-07-2010, 04:41 PM
The economy was bad a year and a half ago, and B.O. has only made it worse.

A year and a half ago? Quit trying to rewrite history. The recession started in december of 2007.