Page 82 of 199 FirstFirst ... 3272808182838492132182 ... LastLast
Results 811 to 820 of 1989

Thread: US economy creates 243,000 jobs in January

  1. #811
    I'm not-low all the time
    Kushinator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    West Loop
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:09 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    16,254

    Re: US economy creates 243,000 jobs in January

    Quote Originally Posted by Conservative View Post
    No, sorry, you didn't answer the question because no verifiable source ever calculates "saved" jobs. That was a made up term because Obama couldn't admit failure. He obviously has fooled people like you and will continue to do so.
    Even before the legislation was passed, Bernstein and Romer (2009) reported that 3.6 million jobs
    would be created or saved by the then envisioned legislation, relative to a no stimulus act baseline.
    This was based on existing estimates of scal policy multipliers. Their estimates included both the
    tax and spending components of the ARRA.
    Congressional Budget Oce (2010) estimates that the employment increase \attributable to the
    ARRA" was in the range of 500 to 900 thousand in 2009 and is in the range of 1.3 to 3.3 million for
    2010. Their ranges are computed based on both government spending as well as tax cut incentives
    in the Act. To construct these numbers (in their Table 1), they divide the total spending of the
    ARRA into its components and then apply low and high output multipliers. These multipliers were
    delivered from previous studies.
    The Council of Economic Advisors (2010) measures the employment increase due to the Act in
    two dierent ways. First, using a multiplier approach similar to the Congressional Budget Oce,
    the CEA estimates that the Act had the eect of increasing employment by 2.5 million workers
    (Table 4). Second, the CEA estimates a vector autoregression which includes employment from
    1990:Q1 to 2007:Q4. Based on those parameter estimates, they forecast gross domestic product
    for the period after the Act's implementation. They then interpret the vector autoregression's
    forecast error for employment from 2009:Q2 to 2010:Q2 as being due to the policy. According to
    these estimates (Table 5), at the end of 2010:Q2, the Act had increased employment by 3.6 million
    workers.
    Blinder and Zandi (2010) nd that the employment increase due to the ARRA (including both
    spending and tax cuts) was 2.7 million jobs. Their estimate is based on the Moody Analytics model
    of the U.S. economy, which is a statistical model that includes restrictions based upon standard
    Keynesian assumptions.
    Wilson (2011) estimates the job eects of the Recovery Act using state-level variation in a
    manner similar to ours. He instruments for endogenity using two cost estimates for the ARRA
    that existed prior to the Act's passage. He considers the eect on employment at dierent horizons
    following the ARRA's implementation. For employment through October 2010, he nd that there
    were 800 thousand additional jobs because of the stimulus. This is close to our \best case" scenario
    for the ARRA described in the previous section.
    While Wilson's above number is relatively small compared to other studies, he does nd larger
    employment eects at a more short-run horizon. When evaluating the employment growth through
    February rather than October of 2010, Wilson nds that the Act saved/created 2.3 million jobs.
    Feyrer and Sacerdote (2011) conduct both a cross-sectional and time series analysis to estimate
    the employment eects of the ARRA. Based on state-level data, their cross-section estimate implies
    that the Act created/saved 1.9 million jobs, while their time series estimate implies that the Act
    created/saved approximately 845 thousand jobs.37
    The most crucial dierence between their analysis and ours may be aggregation. In their
    regressions, the jobs eect is restricted to be identical across employment sectors. Our modest
    disaggregation into four sectors demonstrates that dierent sectors responded dierently to ARRA
    aid. First, we are able to reject statistically the hypothesis of identical sector responses. Sec-
    ond, these dierences are also quantitatively important. Third, the dierent trend behavior, over
    the last decade, across sectors suggests dierent employment processes are at work. Finally, the
    practical consideration that much aid
    owed through state and local governments suggests that
    government employment should be treated dierently than private-sector employment. Also, dif-
    ferences between our results and theirs might be explained by the dierences in instruments; Feyrer
    and Sacerdote (2011) use the average seniority of members of the U.S. House of Representations to
    control for endogenity.
    Cogan and Taylor (2010a) look at Bureau of Economic Analysis data on government purchases
    of goods and services.38 They nd that most government purchases occurred at the Federal rather
    than state and local level and that these purchases account for only 2% of ARRA aid. They argue
    that state and local governments did not make purchases of goods and services, but rather increased
    transfer payments and reduced borrowing. As such, there was only a negligible impact of the Act
    on aggregate output and employment. While our analysis conrms the fact that much funding
    went through states, it is not clear whether wages and salaries of government workers are fully
    or even partially captured by the National Income and Product Account measures of government
    purchases.
    Ask and you shall receive.

    source
    It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion.
    "Wealth of Nations," Book V, Chapter II, Part II, Article I, pg.911

  2. #812
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Huntsville, AL
    Last Seen
    03-03-17 @ 10:28 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    13,813

    Re: US economy creates 243,000 jobs in January

    Quote Originally Posted by Sheik Yerbuti View Post
    You forgot to throw in that he's also a Moslem and a dictator.
    A dictator certainly. Did you see what he did today? He is a public menace. He needs to be defeated. We really need a regime change.

  3. #813
    Sage
    Conservative's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Houston, TX
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 02:37 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    67,250

    Re: US economy creates 243,000 jobs in January

    Quote Originally Posted by Kushinator View Post
    Ask and you shall receive.

    source
    First of all thanks for the information all of which are educated guesses and not official documented data which sources like BLS provide. Did Bernstein and Romer predict that we would have less people working today than when Obama took office? Did they project over a million discouraged workers and a 15.2% U-6 unemployment number? All i see from their projections os a rosy scenerio pointing to job gains and an unemployment rate at around 6% three years after the stimulus was passed.

  4. #814
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Last Seen
    08-25-16 @ 08:31 PM
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    11,265

    Re: US economy creates 243,000 jobs in January

    Quote Originally Posted by Misterveritis View Post
    A dictator certainly. Did you see what he did today? He is a public menace. He needs to be defeated. We really need a regime change.
    oh? What did he do?

  5. #815
    Sage
    pbrauer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Oregon
    Last Seen
    11-27-15 @ 03:31 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    25,394

    Re: US economy creates 243,000 jobs in January

    Quote Originally Posted by Sheik Yerbuti View Post
    oh? What did he do?
    da
    He did an awful thing today - he compromised!


  6. #816
    Sage
    OpportunityCost's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Last Seen
    12-10-17 @ 09:11 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    16,719

    Re: US economy creates 243,000 jobs in January

    Quote Originally Posted by AdamT View Post
    There is absolutely no way they could have qualified for reorganization without the government's help. Rather, they would have gone into Chapter 7 liquidation, meaning that they would have been sold off for pennies on the dollar. And there were no buyers. Little known fact: as Chrysler was approaching collapse, they offered to sell the company, lock, stock, and barrel, to the government ... for $1.
    Anecdotal and no one, on either side, is telling if it was an actual joke or actual offer. On the other, I disagree.

    The Auto Bailout and the Rule of Law > Publications > National Affairs

    The first premise of the "success story" narrative is that, if not for the bailout, General Motors and Chrysler would have been liquidated — causing the loss of many thousands of jobs at those companies and reverberating throughout the industry at the cost of many thousands more. The disappearance of GM in particular — with its roughly 100,000 American employees and its central place in the chain of suppliers, parts manufacturers, and dealers — would have marked the end of the American automobile industry. "If GM were to go into a free-fall bankruptcy and didn't pay its trade debts, then the entire domestic auto industry shuts down," one industry analyst told Time magazine in November 2008. Just before the bailouts, reporters heard much the same case made by officials in the Bush administration.

    But this nightmare scenario was never likely to happen. In the absence of a bailout, GM and Chrysler would each have been forced to file for bankruptcy like any other company in their circumstances. It is possible that Chrysler would have then faced liquidation (though even this is questionable, given the value of its assets and its brands). General Motors, however, would almost certainly have been re-organized. In all likelihood, this re-organization would have produced a company more competitive than the one that emerged from the bailout process.
    Ultimately bailing them out hasn't taught them anything. Their business models are still not functioning very well.

    Something of note, neither company even tried to prepare chapter 11 proceedings because they assumed the government would bail them out. That alone would be a good reason to leave them alone, business decisions like that should not be rewarded. Now, their largest long term debt liabilities holders own the company. What do you figure the odds on a restructure that will put them on a good financial path are?

  7. #817
    Professor
    Dutch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Northern Arkansas
    Last Seen
    08-23-17 @ 09:19 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    1,808

    Re: US economy creates 243,000 jobs in January

    Quote Originally Posted by ThePlayDrive View Post
    BBC:

    Good news for the country, good news for the Democrats, bad news for the Republicans. What do you think? Is the rise temporary? Does it even matter politically? What is causing it?
    It matters politically. It's good for the democratic party. It's good for mr obama. From a practical perspective....it doesn't really matter.



    source
    The president certainly had facts and figures at his disposal. He boasted that his regulatory reforms "will save business and citizens more than $10 billion over the next five years." Wow. Ten billion smackeroos! That's some savings – and in a mere half a decade! Why, it's equivalent to what the Government of the United States borrows every 53 hours. So by midnight on Thursday, Obama had already re-borrowed all those hard-fought savings from 2017. "In the last 22 months," said the president, "businesses have created more than 3 million jobs." Impressive. But 125,000 new foreign workers arrive every month (officially). So we would have to have created 2,750,000 jobs in that period just to stand still.
    He has all the virtues I dislike and none of the vices I admire. ~ Winston Churchill

  8. #818
    Sage
    lizzie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    between two worlds
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    28,581

    Re: US economy creates 243,000 jobs in January

    Quote Originally Posted by Samhain View Post
    As of this report, we are 400,000 jobs shy of the number of employed people 3 years ago.
    .......................

    With 6,000,000 more people living in the US.



    Following are some examples of how statistical magic is used to shrink the labor force and lower the unemployment rate:

    ►The rush to start collecting social security at age 62: When you begin collecting social security, you drop out of the labor force. A few years ago, the forecast was that social security tax would exceed payments until 2016, yet the program ran a deficit last year for the first time ever of $41 billion. While a good part of this year’s social security deficit is related to a one-year two percent social security tax reduction to individuals, a sizable part of the deficit has been caused by less people working, and early filers. Filings were up over 10 percent last year because adults over 62 years old can’t find work.

    51.2 million Americans are currently collecting social security benefits and of that amount, 7.7 million are early retirees, or young survivors of retirees who have passed away. This group is not in the labor force and the vast majority will never return.

    ►Filing for Social Security Disability or SSI: If you are Caucasian, 55 years old, and a permanently-trashed factory worker, this is about the only place you can hope to go and survive as state and local governments gut welfare. In 2000, before employment fell off the cliff, it was reported that 1.4 million a year filed for SSI (only about 50 percent of applicants are approved). In 2010, three million filed.
    Looking at the government statistics for social security and SSI, of the 51.2 million people currently collecting social security, 5.2 million are “disabled” and collecting SSI. Remember, if you’re retired or on SSI you’re not counted as unemployed or in the labor force, so SSI is a neat place to hide over five million desperate workers.

    Workers dropped from the labor force: If you haven’t looked for a job for a few weeks, the government, in their ultimate wisdom, assumes you don’t want a job so they drop you from the labor force. Yet, if you were to ask all those people who didn’t look for a job – because there are no jobs – they would surely tell you they wanted one. There are 6.65 million people in this category and if they were added back in, the unemployment rate would immediately jump from 9 percent, to 12.8 percent.
    http://www.sfgroup.org/The%20Collaps...or%20Force.htm
    Last edited by lizzie; 02-10-12 at 11:21 PM.
    "God is the name by which I designate all things which cross my path violently and recklessly, all things which alter my plans and intentions, and change the course of my life, for better or for worse."
    -C G Jung

  9. #819
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Last Seen
    08-25-16 @ 08:31 PM
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    11,265

    Re: US economy creates 243,000 jobs in January

    Quote Originally Posted by lizzie View Post

    Workers dropped from the labor force: If you haven’t looked for a job for a few weeks, the government, in their ultimate wisdom, assumes you don’t want a job so they drop you from the labor force. Yet, if you were to ask all those people who didn’t look for a job – because there are no jobs – they would surely tell you they wanted one. There are 6.65 million people in this category and if they were added back in, the unemployment rate would immediately jump from 9 percent, to 12.8 percent.

    http://www.sfgroup.org/The Collapse ...abor Force.htm
    That is simply false. Not even close to reality. It's sad to see how easily duped some people are.

    People who drop out of the labor force because they hadn't looked for a job for a few weeks (four, to be exact), are called "marginally attached workers" ...


    Marginally attached workers - definition

    Persons not in the labor force who want and are available for work, and who have looked for a job sometime in the prior 12 months (or since the end of their last job if they held one within the past 12 months), but were not counted as unemployed because they had not searched for work in the 4 weeks preceding the survey. Discouraged workers are a subset of the marginally attached. (See Discouraged workers.)

    Currently, there are 2,809,000...

    Marginally attached workers - thousands


    Not saying that number isn't too high -- just saying it's nowhere near 6˝ million.

  10. #820
    Sage
    AdamT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Last Seen
    02-13-13 @ 04:09 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    17,773

    Re: US economy creates 243,000 jobs in January

    Quote Originally Posted by OpportunityCost View Post
    Anecdotal and no one, on either side, is telling if it was an actual joke or actual offer. On the other, I disagree.

    The Auto Bailout and the Rule of Law > Publications > National Affairs



    Ultimately bailing them out hasn't taught them anything. Their business models are still not functioning very well.

    Something of note, neither company even tried to prepare chapter 11 proceedings because they assumed the government would bail them out. That alone would be a good reason to leave them alone, business decisions like that should not be rewarded. Now, their largest long term debt liabilities holders own the company. What do you figure the odds on a restructure that will put them on a good financial path are?
    I'm sorry, but that is total horse****. Everyone who was involved with GM, Chrysler, and the bailouts has said that they absolutely could not have been reorganized without a bailout. They each required tens of billions of dollars they didn't have, and that no one would lend them, PLUS huge concessions from the UAW. I suggest you read a couple books on the subject if you want to learn more about it:

    Amazon.com: Overhaul: An Insider's Account of the Obama Administration's Emergency Rescue of the Auto Industry: Steven Rattner: Books

    Amazon.com: Once Upon a Car: The Fall and Resurrection of America's Big Three Auto Makers--GM, Ford, and Chrysler (9780061845628): Bill Vlasic: Books

    The reason GM didn't prepare Chapter 11 filings is that they were delusional. They thought they would be bailed out and the government wouldn't force them into Chapter 11. They knew perfectly well that they couldn't file on their own. Chyrsler, OTOH, did prepare for Chapter 11 on the assumption that it would be part of any bailout. But then, at the time, Chrysler was owned by a venture capital company that had a clue.

    The two companies are now profitable and I see no reason why they won't remain profitable. They have radically changed their business models. Ironically, it's actually Chrysler that's bolstering Fiat at the moment, as Fiat tries to weather the Euro-zone crisis.
    Last edited by AdamT; 02-11-12 at 12:59 AM.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •