Page 20 of 23 FirstFirst ... 101819202122 ... LastLast
Results 191 to 200 of 227

Thread: US economy adds 96K jobs, rate falls to 8.1 pct. [W:123]

  1. #191
    Sage

    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Republic of Florida
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 05:41 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    14,010

    Re: US economy adds 96K jobs, rate falls to 8.1 pct. [W:123]

    Quote Originally Posted by Cardinal Fang View Post
    Get a grip, dude. The taxpayer picks up the tab for the net interest on the debt. Nothing else. Principal due each month as notes mature is simply rolled over, typically to the same investor, but if he is actually interested in liquidating his position, then to a different investor instead. Ten-year Treasuries closed yesterday at a yield of 1.77%. People are lined up around the block watiing to lend us money.

    We will in any case never pay off the debt. As in not ever. No one has so much as a fleeting thought of a plan for actually paying off even a part of it at any point in the foreseeable future. I know -- if a household tried to do that, why.....
    Im not your dude, buddy. Try making a single post without an insulting tone.

  2. #192
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Last Seen
    02-15-14 @ 04:49 PM
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    5,939

    Re: US economy adds 96K jobs, rate falls to 8.1 pct. [W:123]

    Quote Originally Posted by DA60 View Post
    Are you saying that the majority of the drop in LFPR is not due to people simply leaving the work force due to frustration at being able to find a suitable job? Yes or no, please?
    No. Let me rephrase in case that was unclear to some. No.

  3. #193
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Where I am now
    Last Seen
    09-11-17 @ 03:00 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    16,386

    Re: US economy adds 96K jobs, rate falls to 8.1 pct. [W:123]

    Quote Originally Posted by Cardinal Fang View Post
    Unconditional surrender is what would long ago have been called for. Try reading this over and over and over again until what is patently evident on the surface of it finally starts to sink in...

    ARRA did what it was designed and projected to do. Everyone credible -- including of course CBO -- agrees that it did. The measure used from the outset was jobs existing in the economy that would not have been there without the effects of ARRA. There is nothing about new jobs.
    And still he cannot admit his error.

    'An inability to admit wrongdoing - even sometimes when presented with objective evidence of their errors or behavior.'

    Narcissistic Personality Disorder


    Now I suggest you (and I) get back on the topic before the mods come by and do it for us.


    Have a nice day.

  4. #194
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Where I am now
    Last Seen
    09-11-17 @ 03:00 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    16,386

    Re: US economy adds 96K jobs, rate falls to 8.1 pct. [W:123]

    Quote Originally Posted by jonny5 View Post
    Im not your dude, buddy. Try making a single post without an insulting tone.
    Don't hold your breath.

  5. #195
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Where I am now
    Last Seen
    09-11-17 @ 03:00 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    16,386

    Re: US economy adds 96K jobs, rate falls to 8.1 pct. [W:123]

    Quote Originally Posted by Cardinal Fang View Post
    No. Let me rephrase in case that was unclear to some. No.
    So then, what was the point of stating all those other 'reasons' if you admit they do not even collectively comprise the majority of the reason for the LFPR drop?

    Another useless rant meant to try and deflect responsibility for the inept handling of the economy from 'your boy' Obama?

    Just as other blinder-equipped partisans try to deflect responsibility from GWB's inept handling of the economy during his term, no doubt.

  6. #196
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Last Seen
    02-15-14 @ 04:49 PM
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    5,939

    Re: US economy adds 96K jobs, rate falls to 8.1 pct. [W:123]

    Quote Originally Posted by DA60 View Post
    None of which you proved AND none of which - even if you did - factually disproves anything I typed.
    Um, your thesis is that the sage laisez-faire tactics of the fiscally conservative Harding worked miracles in the 1920-21 Depression while the dreadful liberal interventionism of FDR in the 1930's actually made matters worse at that time. This is not actually YOUR thesis of course, you simply copy and paste it out of the dung pile over at the Mises Institute. Those are the abject and unrepentant losers who are responsible for it, just as they were responsible for the idiotic meme that CRA was the cause of the credit crisis. They are all paid to lie over there, so lying is what they do.

    In any case, the thesis is shot to pieces by such facts as that the alleged spending cuts by Harding were not actually by Harding but by the liberal Wilson, that the alleged tax cuts by Harding were not actually tax cuts after all, and that the actual proximate causes for the end of the downturn were easy money policies and expansion of the money supply via sustained gold inflows from abroad.

    Quote Originally Posted by DA60 View Post
    what crap is that?
    The crap that Hoover was a big spender whose profligate hand can be seen in the final numbers for the FY 1933 and FY 1934 budgets. I don't propose to repeat an entire different thread here, but when your claims are crushed into dust an scattered to the winds in one thread, turning around and making the same bogus claims again in a different one is a sign of desperate infantilism.

    Quote Originally Posted by DA60 View Post
    That the result was that between mid 1933 and mid 1942, the unemployment rate averaged over 17% AND the DOW actually declined AND the national debt skyrocketed?
    Why do you have to resort to AVERAGE unemployment rates? Is it because an actual time series would fail to support your claims? Why are you trying to use a stock market index as a proxy for the health of the economy when the actual GNP data are available? Is it because those data would simply blow your thesis to pieces? Why are you cherry-picking a date from the middle of WWII to take a stock market price from? Are you not aware of the fact that in 1942, people tended to invest the savings that they had in War Bonds, not in the stock market? I'm afraid that the answers to all of these questions will again reflect very poorly on both your arguments and your integrity.
    Last edited by Cardinal Fang; 09-13-12 at 02:20 PM.

  7. #197
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Where I am now
    Last Seen
    09-11-17 @ 03:00 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    16,386

    Re: US economy adds 96K jobs, rate falls to 8.1 pct. [W:123]

    Quote Originally Posted by Cardinal Fang View Post
    Um, your thesis is that the sage laisez-faire tactics of the fiscally conservative Harding worked miracles in the 1920-21 Depression while the dreadful liberal interventionism of FDR in the 1930's actually made matters worse at that time. This is not actually YOUR thesis of course, you simply copy and paste it out of the dung pile over at the Mises Institute. Those are the abject and unrepentant losers who are responsible for it, just as they were responsible for the idiotic meme that CRA was the cause of the credit crisis. They are all paid to lie over there, so lying is what they do.

    In any case, the thesis is shot to pieces by such facts as that the alleged spending cuts by Harding were not actually by Harding but by the liberal Wilson, that the alleged tax cuts by Harding were not actually tax cuts after all, and that the actual proximate causes for the end of the downturn were easy money policies and expansion of the money supply via sustained gold inflows from abroad.
    True or false?

    The DOW and unemployment rate returned to near pre-1920/21 depression levels within 3 1/2 years despite the fact that government spending under Wilson and Harding was drastically cut?

    True or false, please?

    The crap that Hoover was a big spender whose profligate hand can be seen in the final numbers for the FY 1933 and FY 1934 budgets. I don't propose to repeat an entire different thread here, but when your claims are crushed into dust an scattered to the winds in one thread, turning around and making the same bogus claims again in a different one is a sign of desperate infantilism.
    1) Did the national debt under Hoover go up or down?

    Which is it, please?


    2) In fact, name ANY FY budget (other then possibly 1930 - I am not sure if Hoover or Coolidge presented this FY budget to Congress. I assume the latter did) that Hoover presented to Congress that did not result in a budget deficit?

    http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/data/budget.php


    Why do you have to resort to AVERAGE unemployment rates? Is it because an actual time series would fail to support your claims? Why are you trying to use a stock market index as a proxy for the health of the economy when the actual GNP data are available? Is it because those data would simply blow your thesis to pieces? Why are you cherry-picking a date from the middle of WWII to take a stock market price from? Are you not aware of the fact that in 1942, people tended to invest the savings that they had in War Bonds, not in the stock market? I'm afraid that the answers to all of these questions will again reflect very poorly on both your arguments and your integrity.
    I use those times because they are 3 months after FDR took over (and the initial, temporary DOW rebound from his Emergency Banking Act) until 6 months after Pearl Harbor (when the U.S. war economy was gearing up).

    And those numbers I posted are facts btw.

    From mid' 33 until mid' 42, the umployment rate averaged 17+% and the DOW actually went down...despite huge increases in government debt.


    Have a nice day.
    Last edited by DA60; 09-13-12 at 02:54 PM.

  8. #198
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Last Seen
    02-15-14 @ 04:49 PM
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    5,939

    Re: US economy adds 96K jobs, rate falls to 8.1 pct. [W:123]

    Quote Originally Posted by DA60 View Post
    For once, we agree. Though where we disagree again is on Obama. I think he is almost as total of a failure. He (and the Fed) have spent trillions of dollars to throw at the economy and the result? Stagnation.
    This is not a picture of stagnation. It is a picture of a recovery, albeit one that Republicans since taking control of the House in 2011 have been working to stifle and impede.

    gdp_2005-12_bar.jpg

    Quote Originally Posted by DA60 View Post
    So much so that even more Fed money 'printing' is coming in the form of QE3.
    As the Fed has complained of since the 2010 elections, it no longer has a willing partner in Congress and hence faces the need to bear all of the recovery-boosting burdens on its own back. It's the Republicans, pure and simple.

    Quote Originally Posted by DA60 View Post
    And! Imo, GWB and Obama and ESPECIALLY the Fed are primarily to blame (along with the macro economic ignoramuses in both parties who support their respective POTUS's). I await your normal condescending, bile filled rant in reply.
    People who believe that three separate and distinct entities can each be "primarily to blame" for anything don't deserve a lot of mollycoddling. As for macro skills, well, I can't recommend that you go there. The credit crisis was brought about between 2002 and 2006 by the greed of unbridled cowboy capitalism aided and abetted by the god-awful fiscal, monetary, and regulatory policies of the laissez-faire cheerleaders within the Bush administration. All of those have a heavy cross to bear. Others. not so much.

  9. #199
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Where I am now
    Last Seen
    09-11-17 @ 03:00 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    16,386

    Re: US economy adds 96K jobs, rate falls to 8.1 pct. [W:123]

    Quote Originally Posted by Cardinal Fang View Post
    This is not a picture of stagnation. It is a picture of a recovery, albeit one that Republicans since taking control of the House in 2011 have been working to stifle and impede.
    So where are your links to unbiased facts that proves that the recovery happened primarily due to efforts by Obama and/or the Fed?


    And where are your links to unbiased facts that proves that the recovery was not simply the result of the Great Recession bottoming out and slowly rebounding 'on it's own'?


    People who believe that three separate and distinct entities can each be "primarily to blame" for anything don't deserve a lot of mollycoddling. As for macro skills, well, I can't recommend that you go there. The credit crisis was brought about between 2002 and 2006 by the greed of unbridled cowboy capitalism aided and abetted by the god-awful fiscal, monetary, and regulatory policies of the laissez-faire cheerleaders within the Bush administration. All of those have a heavy cross to bear. Others. not so much.
    The Fed lowering interest rates way too low and for too long, Bush pushing through his incredibly naive low income housing program and Congress's willingness to go along are what (imo) primarily started the housing bubble.

    And I would hardly call those 'free market'.

    That is macroeconomic government meddling if I ever saw it.
    Last edited by DA60; 09-13-12 at 03:09 PM.

  10. #200
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Long Island, New York
    Last Seen
    10-12-14 @ 05:21 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Socialist
    Posts
    407

    Re: US economy adds 96K jobs, rate falls to 8.1 pct. [W:123]

    Quote Originally Posted by Cardinal Fang View Post
    Talk to some qualified labor economists instead of a bunch of media airheads. The number you refer to is and has been declining for a good while. I'm sure you think that Freedom & Liberty® demand that laws be enacted to keep Americans from retiring when they want to, to keep Americans from going to or staying in school when they want to, and to keep Americans from staying home to raise their small children when they want to. But those laws thankfully don't exist, and I don't think even your unqualified Bumbler-Boy Willard intends to pass any, so your just plain stuck with the 130K number being an obviously lame and out-of-date overstatement.
    If you don't believe me, find better numbers and show me. I used the 1995-2002 numbers that ABC released which included births and deaths, when you do the math, you need over 130,000 jobs to keep up with population growth. Prove me wrong and I'll gladly admit that I'm wrong.


    LOL!!! Overall, America was at one of its historic economic high points in January 2001, and in just eight short years, all of that was destroyed by the ignorance of greedy Republican laissez-faire free-market cowboy capitalism, leaving us to deal with the worst economic catastrophe since the Great Depression. Against all odds, we have been in an overall recovery since mid-2009 with the lagging variable of employment not surprisingly lagging. The recovery has of course been attacked and undermined by Republicans at every step along the way. Republicans openly admit that they see partisan interests as superior to national interests and are more than willing to see millions of (non-rich) Americans suffer in the hope that such a situation might buy them a few extra votes.
    Again, prove me wrong and I'll gladly admit I am, you haven't provided any evidence otherwise.

    "Subpar" is being a little generous. George W Bush had the worst jobs performance of any President since WWII. Eight years of miserable disgrace and failure across the board. That's all that Bush provided by any proper sort of math.
    According to that chart he didn't. Average 2002-2008 and 2009-2012, Bush created about 43,000 jobs, while President Obama lost 10,000. Correct me if I'm wrong.

    Bureau of Labor Statistics

Page 20 of 23 FirstFirst ... 101819202122 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

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