Reason Magazine
- reason.com
- reason.tv
- reason.org
- Donate
- Site Search:
Reason on Facebook
Reason on Twitter
Reason on YouTube
Reason RSSGet Reason E-mail Updates!
Manage your Reason e-mail list subscriptionsadvertisements
U.S. Unemployment Jumps to 7.2 percent
Worse than expected.
How does that compare from miseries past? The national rate was 7.2 percent or higher between December 1974 and April 1977 (peaking at an even 9.0), according to the aptly named Misery Index website; and again 7.2 percent or higher between May 1980 and August 1985, with a late-'82 peak of 10.8 percent unemployment. There was also a brief 7.2+ period between December '91 and January '93, peaking at 7.8.
Are we as bad off now as we were during the Carter-Reagan recession? If not, will we soon lap that and graduate direcly to the 1930s? Vote in the comments.
And read Reason's prescient roundtable on "The Coming Recession" from our June 2008 issue.
Anonymous Crank|1.9.09 @ 9:07AM|#
The Frank-Dodd Depression is only getting started.. Wait 'til Obama has the Fed presses running round the clock to print up all new money he needs for the "stimulus" packages.
Go Big Gov|1.9.09 @ 9:08AM|#
Unemployment will peak around mid-Feb after which, the windmill
and solar panel industries will take up the slack.
With Pelosi and Reid, we have nothing to fear. Hope you didn't miss
the amazing Chris Matthews on Hardball, just before the game.
|1.9.09 @ 9:13AM|#
It's a good thing for me that Obama is likely to pass a full employment act for my profession (environmental engineering), especially as I'm graduating in December, but...fuck.
LurkerBold|1.9.09 @ 9:13AM|#
Keep making fun of the greatest president ever elected. When the government jobs programme kicks in we will have a job surplus.
|1.9.09 @ 9:14AM|#
These numbers are probably overly rosy in terms of comparisons
to past periods of high unemployment, owing to changes in how it is
measured, and changes in the work force.
Unemployment will inevitably be higer in January than December, as
temporary holiday work ends.
The Angry Optimist|1.9.09 @ 9:18AM|#
And read Reason's prescient roundtable on "The Coming
Recession" from our June 2008
Calling a June '08 prediction of a recession "prescient" is
stretching it a lil, don't you think?
LurkerBold|1.9.09 @ 9:18AM|#
joe,
Excellent point. Someone yesterday showed how we are really
experiencing around 20% unemployment but the Bush/Cheney number
cooking programme is making it look lower.
Kolohe|1.9.09 @ 9:19AM|#
Unemployment will inevitably be higer in January than
December, as temporary holiday work ends.
Yes, but isn't that the very reason why these figures are
seasonally adjusted?
The Extispicator|1.9.09 @ 9:19AM|#
One more tenth of a point increase and I'm cashing out, stocking
up on canned goods, guns and ammo, and a saw and hammer and going
out to squat on some Federal lands. I'll make a little hut, then
later maybe a rudimentary log cabin.
Damn that law school! Why didn't they teach us any real survival
skills?
LurkerBold|1.9.09 @ 9:19AM|#
Calling a June '08 prediction of a recession "prescient" is
stretching it a lil, don't you think?
Especially since we have been in the greatest depression in our
history for almost 8 years.
|1.9.09 @ 9:21AM|#
...20%? Maybe of the potential workforce, but that's counting
people like my mom, who is 59 and hasn't had a "job" since
1975.
(Scare quotes because my sisters and I have been plenty of work for
her up until I left for college two years ago.)
LurkerBold|1.9.09 @ 9:21AM|#
The Extispicator,
Well as long as your guns are registered and you are a good
cop.
If we had an advanced economic system here all housing would be
Federal.
|1.9.09 @ 9:22AM|#
Stop saying bad things about the economy, everyone. You're
upsetting the troll.
Especially since we have been in the greatest depression in our
history for almost 8 years.
LEAVE GEORGE BUSH ALONE!! HE DOES EVERYTHING FOR YOU PEOPLE!!!
The Angry Optimist|1.9.09 @ 9:22AM|#
ugh, Christ, you suck at trolling, LurkerBold. Go to LGF; you know, somewhere on your skill level.
Reinmoose|1.9.09 @ 9:23AM|#
Unemployment will inevitably be higer in January than
December, as temporary holiday work ends.
Yeah, I was thinking the same thing.
Put me in for 8% by February by current measurements, and higher
than that in reality.
LurkerBold|1.9.09 @ 9:24AM|#
Angry Optomist, what is LGF? Is it a Progressive site? Why do you think Progressives should only keep with other progressives? Intellectual Apartide perhaps?
|1.9.09 @ 9:26AM|#
HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA
HA!!!!!!
gasp gasp
HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA Ohmygod that's so awesome!!!
HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA....
Uh...
I don't get it.
Chris Howell|1.9.09 @ 9:31AM|#
Economists and other experts say this recession is a year old. I
would argue that for many people there has been a severe economic
slump since at least 2000, since the technology bubble burst.
It's been at such a low boil that many just haven't recognized it.
Over the course of eight years I went from someone in the upper
middle class to lower middle class. That doesn't sound like much
but it has had an impact on our lives.
Both my wife and I work full time, but have not seen a substantial
raise in pay for eight years or longer. Sure, we can afford food
and shelter. We're thankful for that but all the extras we used to
be able to afford are gone. Vacations - a thing of the past. A
better car -- forget it. Children - who can afford them?
From my perspective the recession has lasted for the entire Bush
administration. I also think a case could be made that the economy
has been slowly going downhill since the 1970's.
|1.9.09 @ 9:33AM|#
Calling a June '08 prediction of a recession "prescient" is
stretching it a lil, don't you think?
QFT. Especially when they spent the first eight months of that
recession insisting that there wasn't one.
But I'm sure their predictions about the direction of the economy
during the next presidential term are beyond reproach.
|1.9.09 @ 9:33AM|#
Unemployment in 2009 will rise above 10%. The longer it takes
inflation to show up the worse it will be when it hits. Look for
that to be above 10% too.
Everything the government has done, and especially everything Obama
wants to to will make both numbers worse.
Here's another 10% for you. I put a 10% chance that the US defaults
on it's debt in the next year (or else inflates the dollar to
zero).
The Angry Optimist|1.9.09 @ 9:35AM|#
Warren, the United States will never, ever default. And I really do not know what you mean when you say "inflating the dollar to zero". Do you mean that they'll inflate it 100%? That's still a nonzero number.
|1.9.09 @ 9:37AM|#
TAO, I think he means that its value will be less than that of the material it's printed on, which I doubt.
LurkerBold|1.9.09 @ 9:37AM|#
10% inflation will not be a problem if Federal jobs are indexed for inflation. Same thing with aid for oppressed persons.
LurkerBold|1.9.09 @ 9:40AM|#
If the government would use it's powers more eisely they will set prices at a sensible level and we will not get deflation.
|1.9.09 @ 9:42AM|#
TAO,
Not 100%, 10,000%. You know, a wheelbarrow full of bills to buy an
apple, the Weimar scenario.
Where do you get your confidence that "the United States will
never, ever default"? You think some magic protects us from the
laws of supply and demand? That it's "different this time"?
The Angry Optimist|1.9.09 @ 9:46AM|#
Not 100%, 10,000%. You know, a wheelbarrow full of bills to
buy an apple, the Weimar scenario
Um, OK. I don't believe that is going to happen either.
You know I don't have some "magical thinking" that the United
States is somehow immune to default, but think about it: income tax
rates are low, Social Security can be readjusted, on and on. The
United States is carrying a large debt load right now, but there is
still a lot of budgetary room.
I don't see default happening in my lifetime.
LurkerBold|1.9.09 @ 9:46AM|#
Warren,
I think the Nazi influences on the Federal government are in check.
You do not have to worry about the Corporatists making the
government print more money than we need.
Dave W.|1.9.09 @ 9:47AM|#
Time to break up the tired, old big businesses and get some real competition going. Free markets, free minds after all. Deconsolidation time is here. Down with cartels. Go Obama's DoJ.
LurkerBold|1.9.09 @ 9:47AM|#
Angry Optomist,
So you agree that a short term solution is to tax the rich
more?
Bingo|1.9.09 @ 9:48AM|#
Nigel:
Tell me about it. If I was born a few years earlier I might have
been able to get in on the champagne, caviar, and cocaine-filled
festivities of the mortgage industry. The scary thing is that there
are more than a few idiots in that industry that managed to not
save a single penny of their million dollar commissions.
matt2|1.9.09 @ 9:48AM|#
Chris Howell, please regale us with more anectodal evidence about your stagnant career. I can't imagine anything more fascinating.
|1.9.09 @ 9:49AM|#
I don't see default happening in my lifetime.
Good job, genius. Now a precondition for defaulting is your death.
BART cop hit-squads are on their way. ;-)
robc|1.9.09 @ 9:52AM|#
Unemployment will inevitably be higer in January than
December, as temporary holiday work ends.
Isnt the unemp number seasonally adjusted? If so, that shouldnt
make a difference. I also expect January to be higher but just in
general.
The Angry Optimist|1.9.09 @ 9:53AM|#
SugarFree - dammit all, I knew I was overreaching. Oh well, I smoke, if that makes you feel any better.
robc|1.9.09 @ 9:54AM|#
We'll be lucky if we don't see deflation.
We are already seeing deflation. That is why they are trying so
hard to pump more money in. Im, personally, pro-deflation. I
wouldnt mind -2% for a year or so.
|1.9.09 @ 9:55AM|#
I understood the seasonal adjustments to be tailored to actual
seasons - eg, construction slows way down in the north during the
winter and picks up in the summer - rather than month by
month.
I don't really know if the Santa Clause employment bump is factored
in.
|1.9.09 @ 9:57AM|#
think about it: income tax rates are low, Social Security
can be readjusted, on and on. The United States is carrying a large
debt load right now, but there is still a lot of budgetary
room.
Granted. That's why I think the chances are low in the next year.
But the ~10x10^12$ we've already flushed away in just the past year
is a pretty good start don't you think? And so far I'm not hearing
a peep out of ANY corner of the discussion suggesting that what we
need to do is stop printing money, and raise taxes, and let senior
citizens starve, etc. We have a lot of tools in our bag, but so far
the ONLY thing we're doing to stop the flooding is drilling more
holes in the dike.
|1.9.09 @ 9:57AM|#
Tell me about it. If I was born a few years earlier I might have been able to get in on the champagne, caviar, and cocaine-filled festivities of the mortgage industry. The scary thing is that there are more than a few idiots in that industry that managed to not save a single penny of their million dollar commissions.
You're seeing college graduation coming up in the next few years too, I take it?
kinnath|1.9.09 @ 9:59AM|#
In 1984, someone built a new Mac Donald's a block away from my
house. When they starting taking applications, they got 300+
applications on the first day. When they opened they were staffed
entirely with middle-aged people willing to work for minimum
wage.
We're not at that point now.
|1.9.09 @ 9:59AM|#
LurkerBold-
Good morning.
I must confess I am somewhat puzzled. I know that you have a
tremendous amount of admiration for FDR. So, why are you
proclaiming Obama as the greatest president ever elected when he
has not proven, yet, that he can save the economy, and the country
for that matter, as FDR did? Enlighten me.
libertarian democrat|1.9.09 @ 10:01AM|#
Santa Clause employment bump is factored in.
I just found that phrasing really funny.
Is there any liberal/progressive sites that offer a relatively high
level of intellectual and factual commentary like H&R that I
could go to to discuss things much like Joe does here?
|1.9.09 @ 10:02AM|#
TAO-
I knew that you had more libertine in you than you let on! I would
die to defend your right to inhale.
kinnath|1.9.09 @ 10:02AM|#
At the same time, people were climbing over each others backs to take a job a MacD's, mortgage rates were tipping about 15% for a 30 year fixed loan.
|1.9.09 @ 10:05AM|#
Nigel Watt channeling joe
Actually, what I said was "I could go for a donut."
libertarian democrat,
Matthew Yglesias's blog at the CAP is good, but it doesn't get the
traffic that H&R gets.
|1.9.09 @ 10:06AM|#
kinnath,
My parents bought a house in 1979.
A few years later, my father was getting telemarketing calls:
"We'll give you ten thousand dollars in cash if you refinance with
us."
I imagine more than a few suckers bit.
Bingo|1.9.09 @ 10:06AM|#
You're seeing college graduation coming up in the next few years too, I take it?
Nah, I was supposed to graduate a few years ago. Dot-com crash
killed my college savings the first go and I had to drop out,
mortgage bust killed my chances of getting a student loan for the
second attempt at higher education.
If you hear that I'm planning on attending school, pull your money
out of the market immediately!
|1.9.09 @ 10:10AM|#
This is at least as bad as the U-3 unemployment numbers cited in
the blog post:
In December, the number of persons who worked part time for
economic reasons (some-times referred to as involuntary part-time
workers) continued to increase, reaching 8.0 million. The number of
such workers rose by 3.4 million over the past 12 months. This
category includes persons who would like to work full time but were
working part time because their hours had been cut back or because
they were unable to find full-time jobs.
A 74% increase in the number of people working part time who can't
find full-time work.
robc|1.9.09 @ 10:10AM|#
I don't really know if the Santa Clause employment bump is
factored in.
Im pretty sure it is. I dont know the details about unemployment
adjustments, but I know other statistical adjustments adjust for
that. It would be a standard december adjustment.
kinnath|1.9.09 @ 10:12AM|#
I was married with 2 kids when I lost my job in 1982. I lived in one of the largest metropolitan areas in Iowa (a whopping 150,000 people). The want ads in the Sunday paper had less than half a dozen employment ads. Pretty much every part of the local economy was collapsing. Manufactoring was going off shore. Meat packing plants were shutting down. The half the stores in the local mall closed. It was really grim. Today's problems don't even come close.
Kris|1.9.09 @ 10:13AM|#
joe,
You wanna see deflation? Look around. It's not your lucky
day.
High inflation would be a major bailout for everyone underwater in
debt. For someone like me, who has been prudent and thrifty,
avoiding debt, living within, if not below my means in order to
build real savings?
Like robc, I'm pro deflation.
|1.9.09 @ 10:14AM|#
Yes, the headline number is always seasonally adjusted.
The not seasonally adjusted unemployment rate was 7.1
|1.9.09 @ 10:14AM|#
kinnath,
By 1982, we were farther into the recession. What you're describing
is the bottom.
Let's hope what we're seeing now turns out to be the bottom.
Rose|1.9.09 @ 10:15AM|#
libertarian democrat:
Ezra Klein has a good comments section; lower traffic than here but
insightful posts.
The Angry Optimist|1.9.09 @ 10:15AM|#
I love how people who have debt are treated as immoral bastards. Like we're not "prudent and thrifty" either? It's called "investment".
kinnath|1.9.09 @ 10:16AM|#
kinnath,
By 1982, we were farther into the recession. What you're describing
is the bottom.
Iowa didn't bottom out until 86 or 87.
|1.9.09 @ 10:16AM|#
Ezra Klein Good call.
Glenn Greenwald, too, if you like reeeeeeeally long, but
substantive, posts.
|1.9.09 @ 10:18AM|#
This may be a temporary bottom, but given that Obama's giving every indication that he will accelerate the programs of Bush (much like FDR did with Hoover), we can expect this to go on much longer.
|1.9.09 @ 10:18AM|#
Seasonal adjustment, I'm reasonably sure, is done using ARIMA
(auto-regressive something or other--it's done through statistical
regressions).
This means seasonal adjustments are created for each month (though
the survey is conducted over a single week around the 12th) based
on that month in past years, with more weight given to more recent
years.
This means seasonal adjustments get revised a little bit each year.
For instance, June through November seasonally adjusted number for
this year all got bumped up .1%.
|1.9.09 @ 10:18AM|#
Fair enough, kinnath. Farm country took a beating in the 80s,
even during the good times. In a state like Iowa, that's going to
suck in the rest of the economy, too.
Sort of like the industrial midwest in the 90s.
robc|1.9.09 @ 10:21AM|#
Like robc, I'm pro deflation.
Im not really pro deflation as much as Im
anti-intentional-inflation-to-avoid-deflation-at-all-costs.
|1.9.09 @ 10:21AM|#
This may be a temporary bottom, but given that Obama's
giving every indication that he will accelerate the programs of
Bush (much like FDR did with Hoover), we can expect this to go on
much longer.
I see a lot of people on this site taking this position - that
Obama's recovery program is going to deepen and lengthen the
recession.
I want a number.
"If Barack Obama's stimulus plan goes through, and a recovery
begins within _____ years, it will demonstrate that I was
wrong."
Anyone care to step up to the plate?
kinnath|1.9.09 @ 10:22AM|#
After losing my job, I said fuck it and went to school. Lived in
poverty for three years until I graduated in summer 1985.
During practice from commencement, we were split up into groups
based upon school and major. I was in a group of about 30 people
graduating with CompSci or related majors. Our faculty chaperon
asked how many people had jobs lined up. Three quarters of the
hands went up. Then he asked how many were in Iowa. All the hands
went down.
Things didn't really turn around in Iowa until the early 90's.
|1.9.09 @ 10:23AM|#
"If Barack Obama's stimulus plan goes through, and a recovery begins within _____ years, it will demonstrate that I was wrong."
A "recovery" may easily begin within the year. If it does not
fail within 5 years, returning us to a situation at least as bad as
we're in today, I will admit that I was wrong.
Happy?
LurkerBold|1.9.09 @ 10:23AM|#
libertymike,
Because Obama is picking up where FDR left off and is not going to
be hobbled by a do-nothing Republican Congress.
LurkerBold|1.9.09 @ 10:25AM|#
I want a number.
Me too! I knew you had some good stuff in you joe. Hope it was not
anything serious setting you back recently.
robc|1.9.09 @ 10:26AM|#
TAO,
debt != investment
Investment is using your wealth to buy something that (hopefully)
generates income (now or in the future).
It is possible to use debt in order to make investments. That is
leveraging. Leveraging leads to greater profit, but also higher
risk. As people found out with their houses, when you only have 5%
equity, its real easy to lose it all. The margin calls are a
bitch.
Invisible Finger|1.9.09 @ 10:28AM|#
Directly to the 30's. The credit runup of the last 15 years was larger than the credit runup in the 1920's.
The Angry Optimist|1.9.09 @ 10:29AM|#
ha, well, I have a debt load because I am in school...and thanks
to the wisdom of the great state of Ohio, post-undergrad tuition
rates are through the roof (this is what happens when you cap
undergrad rates by statute).
Fuckers, fuckers...anecdotally, a friend of mine started Law School
in 2002 and the tuition was 12K; in 2008 it was 20K. I know
inflation is a bitch, but come on now...
|1.9.09 @ 10:30AM|#
Actually, I meant a song and dance number.
If you're blue and you don't know where to go to...
The Angry Optimist|1.9.09 @ 10:30AM|#
Oh, and to whomever is sockpuppeting LurkerBold:
1. Please stop. It's not funny and you're not doing a very good job
of lampooning anyone or anything.
2. Out of respect for this little community, again, you've been
asked to stop, so please stop already.
It's a respectful request.
|1.9.09 @ 10:33AM|#
Oh relax, Obama and his government are going to fix everything. Go ahead, quit your current job and apply for one of the 600,000 new government jobs being created. Get rid of your health insurance and start putting 40% of your paycheck into a 401K that Obama will eventually create a department to take care of for you. When everyone works for the government, things will settle down just fine. No worries.
dhex|1.9.09 @ 10:33AM|#
"I love how people who have debt are treated as immoral
bastards."
some of them have just been plain fucking stupid. i've watched
friends of mine whom i love dearly do incredibly dumb things. (like
cashing in a 401k, including penalties, to buy a house in a flood
zone with an ARM)
is stupidity immoral? dunno.
LurkerBold|1.9.09 @ 10:33AM|#
Angry Optimist,
I have not seen the impersonator on this thread yet.
Is part of the reason that you are so angry because of the Fascists
who raised your tuition rates just to like the pockets of the
Capitalists? I would be angry too, but please stop being angry with
me. I want a better world for you too.
robc|1.9.09 @ 10:33AM|#
joe,
I cant give you a number because Im not sure how much Obama's plan
matters anymore, one way or the other. Pre-bailout, I said if they
let everyone that needs to fail fail, then we would have 2 really,
really bad years followed by the teens being one of the greatest
growth decades in US history. With the bailout, I predicted Japan
in the 90s.
Obama wants to continue the "imitate Japan" plan, it seems.
I think the bailouts MAY cause us to avoid the really, really bad
years, but 2010-2020 will be weak growth at best.
Feel free to convert all that to some sort of measurable metric as
you see fit.
The Angry Optimist|1.9.09 @ 10:34AM|#
OK, so you don't want to fucking quit, eh?
As Daffy Duck said "As you know, this means war."
|1.9.09 @ 10:35AM|#
We'll need to wait and see on this. There have been a number of
layoffs in a short time frame, but that doesn't mean that everyone
who got laid off won't be able to find work. I think the Chicken
Little approach that's so in vogue in Washington right now has
scared a lot of executives who should know better into hunkering
down and laying off people a little prematurely.
We'll see, of course. Until we have high unemployment, high
interest rates, and either prolonged deflation or high inflation,
it won't hurt like the 70s did.
LurkerBold|1.9.09 @ 10:36AM|#
Angry Optimist,
You do not sound like you are part of the Republican Bush Cheney
War Machine. Can't we live in peace?
I answer your questions, how come you do not answer mine?
Seward|1.9.09 @ 10:37AM|#
joe,
I want a number.
It really depends on just how stupid the government is over the
next few years. Say the incoming Obama administrations tries to do
something like the AAA or the NRA, that is cartelization, price
controls, etc., that will lengthen the economic downturn for as
long as those policies remain in place.
|1.9.09 @ 10:37AM|#
As Daffy Duck said "As you know, this means war."
Metherthmiths!
A whole meth of Metherthmiths!
|1.9.09 @ 10:37AM|#
My wife took a 5% pay cut and laid off an assistant manager this week. Retailers are hurting bad. We're celebrating by getting new flooring and a surveillance system. What's the point in retiring with money if they are just going to take it and give it to the guy who blew all his on blow and whores?
LurkerBold|1.9.09 @ 10:38AM|#
If McCain had been elected we would just see this Great
Depression worsen, like Matt Welch warned us about.
McKinney would have fixed this right away, before being sworn in.
We just have to give Obama some time.
LurkerBold|1.9.09 @ 10:41AM|#
Racist Seward (see the Friday Funnies thread), price controls are one of the things that would work wonders but have not been mentioned by the new administration. I am thinking that it is something being planned behind the scenes and will not be revealed until it is ready.
LurkerBold|1.9.09 @ 10:41AM|#
The imposter finally finishes assaulting the poor at 10:40 to come here and be a pest.
kinnath|1.9.09 @ 10:42AM|#
LurkerBold, you really really fucking boring.
There are many rational arguments to be made for a larger
government intervention into the enconomy, why don't you actually
try to make one of them like joe does.
Kolohe|1.9.09 @ 10:42AM|#
Prediction:
Unemployment continues to get worse over the next 6 months topping
out over the summer at little over 8% for headline, 15% for U6
(currently at 13.5%).
Then in the second half of the year it stabilizes and moves
downward. (and there will be much rejoicing)
However, by the end of the first quarter '10, it will be go higher
again. And by this time, the spectre of inflation, or perhaps it's
full effects will be back, as over 2 trillion in new debt (since
Sept 2008) is floating around the US and world economy. Welcome
back to stagflation. (and we will eat Robin's minstrels)
Rose|1.9.09 @ 10:43AM|#
Joe -- I'll take you up on that. My number is two years, a
little longer than the 1981-1982 recession.
Our best rough point of comparison is the early 80's recession, I
think. Serious stock market crash, bank failures, excessive risk
exposure (then, S&L's). The major difference was policy --
contractionary monetary and fiscal policy, exactly the opposite of
what we have today. It's not a perfect analogue of our current
crisis, but it is the most recent severe recession. If this one
lasts much longer, it might suggest that Obama's policies are
ineffective.
|1.9.09 @ 10:43AM|#
Incidentally, if you compare the way Obama (and, to be fair, the
current president) is handling this with the way that Reagan did
during the early 80s' crisis (granting Reagan's many flaws), it
shows what's wrong with today's breed of "leader". Reagan
understood that consumer confidence and optimism were important
factors to consumers and to business leaders. Acknowledging the
problem is appropriate, but acting like we're all doomed if some
bill doesn't get passed or if some policy isn't adopted isn't
leadership, and it isn't acting presidential. Fail.
And McCain would've done the same thing. As would Frau Clinton.
Maybe Romney would've known better, given his better understanding
of economics, but this type of gloomy, national malaise kind of
talk highlights just how weak our leadership really is today. For
the Democrats who don't want to think about Reagan, would Kennedy
have made a speech like Bush or Obama have made? No way.
|1.9.09 @ 10:44AM|#
kinnath,
LurkerBold doesn't make actual arguments for leftist positions,
because his shtick is to impersonate a leftist while sounding like
an idiot, to make them look bad.
It would be as if I posted as "Libertarian" and wrote "Tax cuts
will cure my baldness" over and over.
Rose|1.9.09 @ 10:46AM|#
Oh, and Joe, I do appreciate your mastery of the American
Songbook.
come let's mix where Rockefellers walk with sticks and
umb-er-ellas...
If we've got to have a Depression, where's my fedora?
|1.9.09 @ 10:46AM|#
in this instance of troll-infestation sock puppeting is
exacerbating the problem. the puppets and or trolls just get off on
the attention and the argument has no content whatsoever. trolls
are just braindead attention whores who offer nothing (unless they
are VERY funny)
With so many people claiming unemployment in the following months
my question is this. Who pays for it? How much is unemployment
usually worth? Am I paying for it? Can I make my unemployment
check-collecting roommate do chores for me because I'm paying for
it?
Can I ride him around like a pony? He always refuses, but I say
"Your ass is mine! Get a job!"
But seriously, who pays for it?
LurkerBold|1.9.09 @ 10:47AM|#
joe,
You act like i am supposed to be exactly like you. Well, I am not.
I am more Progressive than you, but I do agree with many of your
ideas.
Stop being such a spoiled sport and figure out that others have
ideas too.
libertarian democrat|1.9.09 @ 10:49AM|#
Thanks Rose and Joe. Business at work is cyclical, so sometimes I need more things to do while I essentially just answer the phone, and I love discussing politics (or just reading others, I learn alot, especially from those I disagree with).
|1.9.09 @ 10:49AM|#
If we've got to have a Depression, where's my
fedora??
I like the cut of your jib, kid. You've got guts! Moxie!
Grit!
And great gams!
|1.9.09 @ 10:49AM|#
I want a number.
What's Obama's number? What's his criteria for success? Because it
doesn't matter what I predict if he can just say at the end of four
years, "Mission Accomplished!"
kinnath|1.9.09 @ 10:50AM|#
LurkerBold is neither a zealous advocate for left/progressive ideals or a performance artist that provides some level of entertainment. I could live with either one of those.
|1.9.09 @ 10:50AM|#
I think the Chicken Little approach that's so in vogue in
Washington right now has scared a lot of executives who should know
better into hunkering down and laying off people a little
prematurely.
I think that's a big part of it, but I also think some people have
learned from the past, and are trying to stay ahead of the curve.
From the business owner's perspective, anyway. It actually cheers
me up when I hear somebody say they are going to trade market share
for margins.
|1.9.09 @ 10:53AM|#
Some fed,
I haven't heard Obama make any predictions.
I have, however, seen quite a few people on these here threadz make
predictions.
|1.9.09 @ 10:53AM|#
P Brooks,
Maybe, but I think you give too much credit. Executive management
at publicly traded companies these days focus on quarterly or even
monthly results. . .and not much else. They don't want to look like
they didn't prepare for a downturn and don't want to defend their
actions on earning calls. So they just rush to "do something".
Sound familiar?
Whatever your politics, we should all be distressed at the
unthinking, Disney lemming-like behavior.
|1.9.09 @ 10:54AM|#
joe,
Are you a BC guy? My boss is, and I was wondering whether the BC
coach was going to get fired.
Mike M.|1.9.09 @ 10:55AM|#
My wife took a 5% pay cut and laid off an assistant manager
this week. Retailers are hurting bad.
Yep. The shopping malls look like ghost towns (even more so than
post-Christmas usually does), and even the venerable Macy's is
having to close down stores.
I wouldn't be surprised one bit to see unemployment at 10% or more
within the next month or two.
|1.9.09 @ 10:57AM|#
I always hear the "it's psychological, the politicians are
talking down the economy" excuse trotted out when recessions start.
I remember hearing it in 1992, and again in 2001, and now I'm
seeing it again.
Several trillion dollars in wealth just evaporated. We've
officially been in a recession for over a year now. Employment has
been falling the whole time. Consumer spending and construction are
both in the toilet. There's probably a more plausible explanation
for why unemployment rose steeply in December than employers'
psychology.
robc|1.9.09 @ 10:57AM|#
I was wondering whether the BC coach was going to get
fired.
He already has been.
MNG|1.9.09 @ 10:58AM|#
joe
That shit with the BC coach was totally unfair. "Oh you got us to a
bowl and winning our part of the ACC, but you talked to someone
else so there you go." That kind of shit gets you playing at Duke's
level (in football of course :)).
And thanks for the Barbarella reference. Fonda was perhaps the
hottest woman on the planet at that time, but that movie infuriates
me with its stubborn refusal to show a little nudity.
Pan down! Pan down!
|1.9.09 @ 10:58AM|#
Unemployment benefits, and who qualifies for them, varies from
state to state.
Some states are offering extended benefits beyond the normal length
of elegibility, as has the federal government, in light of current
unemployment rates.
When states run out of money (supposed to be stocked up by states
from employer and employee contributions to Unemployment Insurance
during non-recessions), the Federal Government will bail them out
from general revenues. This will happen first to those states that
have given the most generous benefits--or spent all their money on
hookers.
|1.9.09 @ 10:58AM|#
Pro Lib,
Big BC guy. I remembe watching The Pass live as a kid. My dad went
there, and GW didn't have a football team, so that's my rooting
interest.
Coach Jags was fired yesterday. Don't lie to a Catholic school!
Seward|1.9.09 @ 10:59AM|#
joe,
Obama has made numerous predictions. For example, the number of new
green jobs that will supposedly be created by his policies. What's
the figure? 2.5 million? Of course, I don't think predictions like
that are very meaningful, and its the sort of thing that every
President predicts. Most politicians are going to avoid anything
more specific than that.
robc|1.9.09 @ 10:59AM|#
I haven't heard Obama make any predictions.
I think all policies and laws should come with predictions. That
way we can measure a programs success or failure rate.
Ex: For $10B this welfare program will reduce the US poverty rate
by 20% within 6 years.
LurkerBold|1.9.09 @ 11:04AM|#
Several trillion dollars in wealth just evaporated. We've
officially been in a recession for over a year now. Employment has
been falling the whole time. Consumer spending and construction are
both in the toilet. There's probably a more plausible explanation
for why unemployment rose steeply in December than employers'
psychology.
You are much more optomistic and generous with your numbers than
I.
We have been in a depression for quite some time except the
Republican sound machine keeps trying to convince us that we are
not.
Seward|1.9.09 @ 11:04AM|#
joe,
Obama would be quite foolish to make any sort of prediction like
that.
robc,
But government policies lack the either the price mechanism or the
fear of going out of business. How good could a prediction be in
that dismal of an information environment?
robc|1.9.09 @ 11:05AM|#
Seward,
Oh, it wouldnt work, it would just give us something to make fun of
them for.
|1.9.09 @ 11:06AM|#
I see, so I shouldn't razz my roommate for collecting unemployment. After all, if he didn't collect it then he couldn't pay his share of rent and *somebody* would have to pay it. Which would be me and that would be shitty.
MNG|1.9.09 @ 11:07AM|#
Hate to ride my hobby horse here (but I'm busy right now and
this is egregiously pressing), but if you think 7% unemployment and
two quarters of no growth are bad, try living where 87% of the
population lives below the poverty line and 75% of factories have
been shit down all because of direct government force (guns). Oh,
and over 700 of your neighbors blown to hell.
Such a focus on an (admittedly imo, I just want a tax cut) wrong
headed government stimulus plan while this is going on is
redunkulous for anyone who gives a shit about liberty and rights.
Sorry.
http://www.unhcr.org/refworld/category,COI,HRW,ANNUALREPORT,ISR,47a87c07c,0.html
Seward|1.9.09 @ 11:07AM|#
robc,
You know, if government agencies could actually fail (like
businesses used to be able to), that could go a long way towards
making government far efficient, useful, etc.
kinnath|1.9.09 @ 11:08AM|#
Psychology is a very the important
factor in the business cycle.
The lemmings drive bubbles up and troughs down.
Lefiti|1.9.09 @ 11:16AM|#
Fools, if Cynthia McKinney was elected we wouldn't have all
these problems.
http://www.cracked.com/article_16748_6-most-insane-people-ever-run-president.html
|1.9.09 @ 11:18AM|#
joe/robc,
I missed the news--I had other college football activities on my
mind yesterday.
joe,
I actually agree that politicians and others can get too caught up
in the psychological elements of the economy, but the fact remains
that overreacting and not demonstrating calm optimism is not a
leadership trait. Bush/Obama have both looked weak on this matter.
But Obama has time to learn from his mistakes--Bush has failed
utterly, capping off his bad presidency with one of his worst
moments.
EJM|1.9.09 @ 11:18AM|#
I haven't heard Obama make any predictions.
I have, however, seen quite a few people on these here threadz make
predictions.
Of course, the only prediction that truly matters is George Webb's...
Another famous George Webb tradition that continues today is
his famous baseball prediction. Starting in the 1940's with the
Brewer teams of the American Association, and through the Braves'
stay in Milwaukee, George Webb predicted our team would win 12
straight games. It was speculated for many years that if the team
would achieve the lucky streak, George Webb would give away free
hamburgers. The prediction continued in the 1970's and 1980's with
the major league Brewers, and on April 19, 1987, the Brewers won 12
straight games. Three days and 168,194 hamburgers later, the payoff
was fulfilled to thrilled George Webb customers and Brewer fans
alike. Although the team has not repeated this feat since 1987,
they have come close several times, while Wisconsinites continue to
support the team toward making the prediction come true.
|1.9.09 @ 11:18AM|#
If by the end of the year we don't have...
significant bank failures (where people start publishing %-of-banks
figures)
stagflation,
price controls/rationing,
banking nationalization,
riots/furloughs preventing the regular publishing of
statistics,
or Treasury pulling something Argentine with the national
debt...
I will go back to assuming I don't know anything about
macroeconomics.
Oh, as an economist, I'd argue Economics is more likely a branch of
sociology than psychology, which is probably worse. It used to be
part of political science, for what that's worth.
TallDave|1.9.09 @ 11:18AM|#
Shrug. What did you expect when you elected Democrats? The
markets gave up on being allowed to make a profit back around
September.
I assume the media are already working on some kind of new
statistic based on how sensitive and eco-friendly the country is
that will prove things are wonderful.
|1.9.09 @ 11:18AM|#
MNG-
Ditto.
Joe-
How about a little balance with the BC story? Have we forgotten
about the athletic director's (Deflipflop) sordid conduct a couple
of years ago relative to BC's jump from the Big East to the
ACC?
LurkerBold|1.9.09 @ 11:21AM|#
some fed,
I would be with you if that Republican got elected, but one of the
good guys won.
Naga Sadow|1.9.09 @ 11:22AM|#
Sweet Jesus! Lefiti AND LurkerBold? I fear some sort of troll vortex that may just suck us into some sort of troll dimension.
libertarian democrat|1.9.09 @ 11:22AM|#
somefed,
I would agree with you, because I find most of the important
aspects of sociology to be a combination of social psychology and
history.
LurkerBold|1.9.09 @ 11:23AM|#
TallDave,
Yea, go cry that your goons did not get elected and now we do not
have to live in fear of our doors being broken down or phones
tapped and all of our property being handed over to the
corporations.
Douglas Gray|1.9.09 @ 11:29AM|#
Joe is essentially right in that the actual unemployment is
higher due to the Feds cooking the numbers since the time of
Clinton.
What we will see with Obama is creation of jobs through more
deficit spending rather than through viable economic activity
generated by the private sector.
|1.9.09 @ 11:30AM|#
Pro Lib-
The coach Jags story has been a sports talk radio melodrama here
all this week. Most of the hosts and callers on WEEI 850 AM have
hit the coach hard. A couple of callers, however, have provided
some balance by pointing out that, to the extent that the matter
turns on the credibility of the principals, we should not forget
that BC's AD did not exactly conduct himself with honor in BC's
jump from the the Big East to the ACC.
|1.9.09 @ 11:38AM|#
demonstrating calm optimism
I am, much of the time, so calmly optimistic as to appear comatose
to the untrained eye. Put me in, Coach!
|1.9.09 @ 11:40AM|#
The markets gave up on being allowed to make a profit back
around September.
Uh, yeah, the stock market sure was booming from December through
September. Obama recession, Obama recession!
Oh, wait, the stock market hit bottom then, and has been coming
back.
"And then, when he saw my Fidelity statement, he carved this B on
my face!"
|1.9.09 @ 11:45AM|#
Yes, let's not blame the recession on Obama. If it's 2010, and the government has continued to "do something" that seems to be prolonging the problem, then we can rise in revolt and tar and feather him. Until then, it's the federal government's enhanced recession (we were due for the market variety recession, anyway, but Bush/Congress have helped make it so much more special).
|1.9.09 @ 11:45AM|#
Meant to say, the stock market fell off a cliff in early October, hit bottom in early November, and has been slowly coming back since then.
Just Hanging Out|1.9.09 @ 11:56AM|#
"Only the teachings of Mao can get us out of this
depression."
Well I guess killing 6 million plus people and thus taking them out
of the workforce would change those unemployment numbers. Yep Mao's
way COULD work I guess.
|1.9.09 @ 11:59AM|#
Yes, let's not blame the recession on Obama. If it's 2010,
and the government has continued to "do something" that seems to be
prolonging the problem, then we can rise in revolt and tar and
feather him.
I can't agree Pro Lib. I think part of the reason we're in this
mess, is because we waited too long to start bashing Bush. We
should start insisting Obama provide every little girl with a pony
before he takes office. That will put things on a better
footing.
|1.9.09 @ 12:14PM|#
I bashed Bush early, rolling my eyes at the idea the lug even got nominated. But he got a honeymoon because of 9/11. Even Reagan got an extended one because of the assassination attempt. I hope Obama has to contend with neither, of course, so maybe he'll be dogged from Day One. Like he (and any other president) should be.
Gilbert Martin|1.9.09 @ 12:25PM|#
"Yes, let's not blame the recession on Obama"
OK - we can blame it on his Congressional pals such as Barney Frank
and Chris Dodd instead.
LurkerBold|1.9.09 @ 12:34PM|#
Just Hanging Out,
You were responding to an imitator of me. You did it with
Capitalist scare words and lies, but you were not responding to
me.
I do not limit insight to just one great thinker.
Just Hanging Out|1.9.09 @ 12:50PM|#
Reaching in pocket for troll food:
LurkerBold,
Sorry but I just HAVE to know exactly what scare words and lies
were used. It's Friday, it's slow, I need some entertainment.
|1.9.09 @ 12:59PM|#
You can't tell the difference between LurkerBold and imitators writing idiotic things to make him look bad, because LurkerBold himself is purposely writing idiotic things to make his adopted persona look bad.
LurkerBold|1.9.09 @ 12:59PM|#
Now you are just being a pest. You know what you did and you did it on purpose.
Homer|1.9.09 @ 1:00PM|#
How long can Obama blame the Frank-Dodd affirmative action recession on Bush? By the way exactly how much is my middle class tax cut? And why are people who pay no income taxes getting rebates?
Just Hanging Out|1.9.09 @ 1:01PM|#
Joe,
I know this but it is kind of like playing with a magic eight ball.
You know it is bullshit but you still like shaking it up to see
what it comes up with.
|1.9.09 @ 1:06PM|#
Only the teachings of Mao can get us out of this
depression.
I prefer the teachings of
Miaow
|1.9.09 @ 1:08PM|#
Ha. Well put.
How long can Obama blame the Frank-Dodd affirmative action
recession on Bush? For as long as the amount of lending going
towards lower income neighborhoods remains too small to explain the
financial meltdown, while the majority of toxic debt came in the
form of unregulated derivatives from mortgages and refinances and
HELOCs on expensive homes in the suburbs.
Which is to say, eternally, because those truths about the lending
explosion in the early 00s will not be undone.
LurkerBold|1.9.09 @ 1:14PM|#
Governments are the best way to achieve full employment. One
must only look at Germany 1933-1945, the USSR 1917-1990, China
under Mao, and Cambodia under Pol Pot.
Unfortunately the capitalists have been spreading lies about these
people with the help of the Freemason and Zionist run media.
|1.9.09 @ 1:14PM|#
I see a lot of people on this site taking this position -
that Obama's recovery program is going to deepen and lengthen the
recession.
I want a number.
Everybody knows it's 42.
Seriously, FDR's (Hoover gets some credit too) programs gave us a
depression that lasted from '30 - '39. I expect it won't be that
bad this time around but if the borrow (or print) a shitload of
money to spend on who the hell knows Obama plan happens (it will)
this could be a real tough half decade (2008-2013).
My proposed prescription was shot out of the water by Bush, the
retarded special* son, long ago.
* I can be PC too.
Lefiti|1.9.09 @ 1:15PM|#
We have a saying in my country - the coyote of the desert likes to eat the heart of the young and the blood drips down to his children for breakfast, lunch and dinner.
BDB|1.9.09 @ 1:18PM|#
LukerBold, you're the worst troll ever. Go get some lessons from Lefiti or OLS.
LurkerBold|1.9.09 @ 1:19PM|#
The "LurkerBold" at 1:14 will probably come up as joe pretty
soon too.
Don't people around here have anything more intellectual to do than
online forgery?
joe|1.9.09 @ 1:27PM|#
I admit it, this is in fact part of a conspiracy brought on by the illuminati which is intent of perpetrating the myth that Mao was a mass murderer. The reality is that Mao actually created a utopia, where the children played with gumdrop smiles under the rainbow, free love reigned, and everyone was happy.
|1.9.09 @ 1:32PM|#
Seriously, FDR's (Hoover gets some credit too) programs gave
us a depression that lasted from '30 - '39.
Actually, FDR's programs (ones focused on public spending) gave us
a recovery that lasted from 1933-1937. Then, a different FDR
program (fiscal austerity, the end of the public spending) gave us
another deep recession in 1937. The another round of big public
spending beginning in 1940 gave us another recovery.
The whole "FDR prolonged the Depression" argument is refuted by the
recovery and reversal from 33-38. If this theory was correct, there
could not have been a period of dramatically falling unemployment
and rising GDP growth followed by a reversal, followed by another
robust recovery, but rather, a steady 10 year period of stagnant
growth.
Lots of predictions about what a big recovery/stimulus package will
do. Here's mine: recession ends around the end of 2009, weak growth
in 2010, picking up in 2011 and thereafter. My only worry is that
the government won't commit the necessary resources to paying down
this enormous debt during the good times in the mid-to-late
teens.
|1.9.09 @ 1:38PM|#
PS - that's where youze guyz come in.
When there is a national debt of $16 or $18 trillion dollars in,
say, 2017, and the government runs a surplus, there are going to be
lots of Laffer-Curving Dick Cheney types saying "Reagan proved that
deficits don't matter," and arguing for big tax cuts instead of
debt reduction. Just like in 1998-1999.
It would be awfully nice if some of the people howling about public
debt and the paper-chasing profits it fosters spoke up this
time.
BDB|1.9.09 @ 1:40PM|#
I doubt the government will run a surplus ever again. There were
a lot of very specific conditions in the 1990s that won't be
replicated again in our lifetimes (more or less world peace so less
defense spending, divided government, a new technology that fueled
a boom).
I especially don't expect the first to happen for the next 60 years
at least.
The Angry Optimist|1.9.09 @ 2:07PM|#
joe - although I catch your point, the Laffer Curve and the "Deficits Don't Matter" viewpoints, while they run together with certain people, are distinct ideas. It is a little unfair to put them both together just because some people see them as the same.
The Angry Optimist|1.9.09 @ 2:08PM|#
But regardless, I will be a deficit hawk my entire life, so I've got your back.
|1.9.09 @ 2:08PM|#
Actually, FDR's programs (ones focused on public spending) gave
us a recovery that lasted from 1933-1937. Then, a different FDR
program (fiscal austerity, the end of the public spending) gave us
another deep recession in 1937. The another round of big public
spending beginning in 1940 gave us another recovery.
Yeah, the economy was improving at a very slow rate and then dipped
again circa 1937.
As the kids say, Meh.
LurkerBold|1.9.09 @ 2:15PM|#
J sub D,
If the Bushes had not started WW-II then FDR would not have gotten
to spend so much money. Gonna credit them with the recovery
now?
|1.9.09 @ 2:25PM|#
TAO,
Fair enough. I was a bit glib there.
J sub D,
The fact that unemployment was at a ridiculous level when FDR took
office does not demonstrate that the recovery between 33 and 37 was
"meh." Unemployment dropped nine points! Imagine every single
unemployed person in America in December 08 finding a job: the fall
in unemployment between 33 and 37 was significantly larger than
that.
LurkerBold|1.9.09 @ 2:33PM|#
joe,
Weren't there something like 31 million people unemployed in the 33
- 37 depression period? That would make the 9 point drop if my
number is right around 3 million getting new jobs. There are a lot
more people unemployed now than that a LOT more.
robc|1.9.09 @ 2:33PM|#
joe,
It would be awfully nice if some of the people howling about
public debt and the paper-chasing profits it fosters spoke up this
time.
Ive favored both giant tax cuts and massive paying down of the debt
EVERY time. I expect the next time things get good to be no
different.
I see no reason we cant do both at the same time. We have to cut
out 90+% of the federal government, but Im okay with that.
robc|1.9.09 @ 2:36PM|#
Adding on to my 2:33 post, I favor massive tax cuts and paying
down the debt even during bad times like right now.
The state of the economy has no effect on my being a deficit hawk
and an anti-taxer.
LurkerBold|1.9.09 @ 2:37PM|#
robc,
Can we start with the Impearilist War Machine on the cuts part? We
could do a lot more good with that moeny.
LurkerBold|1.9.09 @ 2:42PM|#
robc,
If you are not going to bother answering at least spare us the fake
postings.
Gilbert Martin|1.9.09 @ 2:44PM|#
"Yeah, the economy was improving at a very slow rate and then
dipped again circa 1937.
As the kids say, Meh."
Meh, indeed.
And, of course, there is absolutely no proof whatsoever that
anything FDR did in that peroid had anything to do with that
interim, slow improvement to begin with.
LurkerBold|1.9.09 @ 2:46PM|#
And, of course, there is absolutely no proof whatsoever that
anything FDR did in that peroid had anything to do with that
interim, slow improvement to begin with.
There is plenty of proof that it did, just read a history
book.
Do you have any proof that it didn't?
Meta-LurkerBold|1.9.09 @ 2:47PM|#
The best jobs program would be to start a war with Iran. There would be plenty of jobs in the military then.
Meta-LurkerBold|1.9.09 @ 2:49PM|#
Plus there would be more dead people, and therefore fewer
workers. The demand for labor would go up then.
We should start now.
|1.9.09 @ 2:55PM|#
robc,
Let's call cutting 90% of the federal government Plan A. Now, on
the off chance that doesn't happen, you're going to have a choice
to make.
Saying you really love shrinking the debt, right up until it might
cost you something else you want, means you're not really a deficit
hawk.
Gilbert Martin|1.9.09 @ 2:55PM|#
"Do you have any proof that it didn't?"
I don't have to prove a negative, Lurkboy.
The burden of proof is on those arguing the affirmative.
And just as is the case with the man-made global warming theory -
anything that cannot be proven with ABSOLUTE definitiveness isn't
proven at all.
Meta-LurkerBold|1.9.09 @ 2:57PM|#
If it wasn't for Bill Clinton and gay people buying homes, we wouldn't have a recession.
|1.9.09 @ 2:57PM|#
And, of course, there is absolutely no proof whatsoever that
anything FDR did in that peroid had anything to do with that
interim, slow improvement to begin with.
Mind you, Gilbert finds nothing whatsoever to argue with in the
oft-posted argument that the ten years of stagnant growth between
33 and 43 demonstrates definitively that FDR prolonged the
depression.
Even that whole "ten years of stagnant growth" thing didn't
actually happen.
|1.9.09 @ 3:00PM|#
joe, I know the argument. It would have been worse had FDR not
hired a bunch of photographers and writers, CCC, TVA etc. blah,
blah, blah.
You know the counter-argument as well. FDR's new deal only
prolonged the misery by directing money into unproductive sections
of the economy, hiring useless bureaucrats, wage and price
controls, yadda, yadda, yadda.
Fact - '32-'40 unemplayoment was greater than 10%. Look at the
title of this post, the number were all decrying. It's 7.2%.
Meta-LurkerBold|1.9.09 @ 3:01PM|#
Our modern Churchill, George W. Bush, would have ended the depression with his sheer brilliance!
LurkerBold|1.9.09 @ 3:24PM|#
J sub D,
TVA brought electricity to the rural people. You cannot possibly
find fault with that.
|1.9.09 @ 3:59PM|#
The stock market hit its bottom in november.
Employment is always a lagging indicator
Real estate nation wide probably has not hit bottom yet but it is
getting close and it is a regional market so some have hit
already.
Sometime next fall the end of the recession will be claimed to have
ended in the proceeding spring.
|1.9.09 @ 4:24PM|#
J sub D,
Are you steadfastly refusing to acknowledge that change in policy
and economic fortunes in 1937, and talking about decade-long
averages, for any particular reason?
Mike M.|1.9.09 @ 4:54PM|#
The stock market hit its bottom in november.
Maybe, but I think it's still too early to make this as a
definitive proclamation.
robc|1.9.09 @ 4:54PM|#
joe,
Now, on the off chance that doesn't happen, you're going to
have a choice to make.
You know me. I always vote for Plan A. I havent voted for a
presidential winner (or 2nd place finisher ever, or 3rd place for a
long while too) since 1988. Ive got 20 years of sticking with Plan
A when B and C are the only options. I usually dont care for D E or
F either.
I dont vote for Kang or Kodos.
To answer your more specific question, Im perfectly willing to
split any spending cuts between deficit reduction and tax cuts. Im
willing to go all the way to 67:33 until we eliminate the deficit
and then 50:50 until the debt is payed off. Of course, since I am
also sure we are above the peak of the laffer curve, tax cuts will
increase tax revenue (although federal tax cuts may just fill the
coffers of the states and cities) so that only helps the deficit
out a little more.
Kris|1.9.09 @ 10:10PM|#
TAO,
Sorry I couldn't reply sooner, Ive been tied up all day. I posted
my comment this morning shortly after waking up, and I was pretty
grumpy. I certainly didn't mean to imply anything immoral about
taking on debt. I apologize. I also regret saying I'm "pro
deflation." I'm not. I just appose Uncle Sam interfering in the
market.
Kris|1.9.09 @ 10:25PM|#
Also, it sounds like your debt is in student loans for law school. I recommend focusing on bankruptcy law. You'll get the best return on your investment that way. Of course, your an angry optimist, and I'm a complacent pessimist. In any case, what you choose to do will be at worst, morally neutral.
Kris|1.9.09 @ 10:43PM|#
Joshua Corning says:
The stock market hit its bottom in november.
Prediction: S&P begins a decent to 650 or lower in Q1
2009.
Employment is always a lagging indicator
Duh!
Real estate nation wide probably has not hit bottom yet
Gee, ya think? but it is getting close and it
is a regional market so some have hit already not
likely, but maybe.
(Bold = my comments)
Prediction: housing market bottoms in late 2011 or early 2012
(optimistic)
Site comments/questions:
Media Inquiries and Reprint Permissions:
(310) 367-6109
Editorial & Production Offices:
3415 S. Sepulveda Blvd.
Suite 400
Los Angeles, CA 90034
(310) 391-2245