President Obama Working Miracles

[deception]

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/08/business/economy/08jobs.html?_r=1&hp

The most hopeful jobs report since last summer suggested Friday that the recession was ending, but the recovery will be marked by a still-rising unemployment rate and tens of thousands of job losses each month until next year.

The American economy shed 247,000 jobs last month, the smallest monthly toll since last August, the government reported on Friday. While businesses are expected to keep cutting positions through the rest of the year, the Labor Department’s latest figures offered hopeful signs for the American worker and a measure of relief to the Obama administration, which has faced rising criticism as unemployment blew past its earlier projections.

“The trend lines are positive,” said Mark Zandi, chief economist at Moody’s Economy.com. “We are going from massive job losses to just big job losses on our way to a stable job market, I think by next spring.”

The length of the workweek increased, albeit slightly, for the first time since August, a sign that businesses were not scaling back hours to cut their payroll costs. The government said fewer jobs were lost this spring than it had initially estimated, revising June’s lob losses to 443,000 from 467,000. Hourly earnings rose.

In a reversal, the unemployment rate dropped to 9.4 percent from 9.5 percent, defying expectations of an increase. But economists cautioned that the unemployment rate had only declined because 400,000 people gave up their search for work and left the labor force.

But administration officials cited Friday’s unemployment report as evidence that the $787 billion stimulus, the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, was working, and that the economy had edged back from the brink of depression.

“Were it not for the economic activity generated by the act, we would have lost hundreds of thousands more jobs last month,” said Jared Bernstein, the top economic adviser to Vice President Biden.

The administration weathered intense criticism last month when the pace of job losses accelerated after leveling off in May. Conservative critics have cited the monthly jobs report, which has rapidly become a political football, as evidence that the $787 billion stimulus was not working, while liberals have previously maintained that it showed that the economy needed another jolt of stimulus.

The White House has said there is no immediate need for an additional package, and has urged Americans to be patient as stimulus spending percolates through the economy.

Now, even if the economy begins growing again this summer — as many economists expect it will — laid-off workers are likely to be among the last to benefit. Businesses that slashed their work force and inventories over the last year to cope with the economic deterioration are likely to hire temporary workers or pay overtime wages before they begin fielding applications for new full-time workers.

That means hundreds of thousands more workers are likely to lose their jobs, perhaps well into next year.

“The basic message is that the rate of job cuts is diminishing, and that’s good news,” said Nariman Behravesh, chief economist at IHS Global Insight. “Still, you’re seeing job cuts everywhere except education, health care, government. I don’t think we’re at bottom yet in employment.”

 

[deception]

americans are witnessing the dividends of 6 months of de-bushification

 

[porky88]

No doubt that it will take time to get out of the recession, but these numbers still suck. I mean it's improvement and we'll see if it's a trend that continues, but I'm not going get all excited or anticipate something good happening. I want to see consistency in the right direction.

 

[maxiep]

Yeah, those 28 quarters of positive growth were just terrible under President Bush. Also, a lot of people were getting all stressed out with those sub-5% unemployment rates--working is hard!

As for stimulus spending having anything to do with unemployment rates lessening (and only an idiot says it's a good thing we've only lost a quarter million jobs in a month), check how much of the "stimulus" was actually spent. Economies are self-correcting and there's little the Federal Government can do about it.

 

[deception]

Yeah, those 28 quarters of positive growth were just terrible under President Bush. Also, a lot of people were getting all stressed out with those sub-5% unemployment rates--working is hard!

As for stimulus spending having anything to do with unemployment rates lessening (and only an idiot says it's a good thing we've only lost a quarter million jobs in a month), check how much of the "stimulus" was actually spent. Economies are self-correcting and there's little the Federal Government can do about it.

self correcting? maybe in an economic textbook, not in real life. if i was obama- i would modernize the antiquated regulation on wall street that hasnt changed since the depression.

 

[deception]

and there isnt a silver bullet solution to america's economic woes

 

[maxiep]

self correcting? maybe in an economic textbook, not in real life. if i was obama- i would modernize the antiquated regulation on wall street that hasnt changed since the depression.

Umm, did you miss the repeal of Glass-Steagall? And it's not just in an economic textbook. How do you think this country emerged from the deep recession of the early 1980s?

 

[maxiep]

and there isnt a silver bullet solution to america's economic woes

Nope, but Obama's solution seems to be putting that silver bullet in a gun, sticking it in America's mouth and pulling the trigger.

 

[porky88]

I'm still baffled why republicans still defend Bush. Every party has terrible Presidents and great ones. There isn't one way to be a good President in my view. You deal with what you got and you go from there. Bush was bad, but Reagan was solid. The republicans will have a bad President again, but they'll probably have a great one again. Same goes for the Dems.

Obama may very well lead us out of this recession. In fact he will and when he does, his popularity will soar. It's that simple. At what cost though? The deficit is going to be awful for I assume the next decade and someone is going to have to raise taxes eventually because of this. Everyone will just pay more.

Then it'll probably happen all over again in the 2020's.

 

[maxiep]

I'm still baffled why republicans still defend Bush. Every party has terrible Presidents and great ones. There isn't one way to be a good President in my view. You deal with what you got and you go from there. Bush was bad, but Reagan was solid. The republicans will have a bad President again, but they'll probably have a great one again. Same goes for the Dems.

I'm not defending President Bush. Heck, I never even voted for him. That being said, you have to recognize the economic reality of his Presidency. His economic record would have even been better without the profligate spending under his Administration.

Obama may very well lead us out of this recession. In fact he will and when he does, his popularity will soar. It's that simple. At what cost though? The deficit is going to be awful for I assume the next decade and someone is going to have to raise taxes eventually because of this. Everyone will just pay more.

What angers me about this spending is that I'm not going to pay for it. My son is going to have to pay for it. When you're a parent, you would do almost anything to ease the burden on your progeny. What's happening is the exact opposite. To try to avoid short term pain, we're putting a huge burden on future generations.

What's most shameful is this spending isn't to stimulate the economy at all. If it were, it would have all been spent this year. Instead, the majority is going to be spent in 2010, which is...wait for it...an election year!

The economy will improve, but because the economy is resilient, not because of these spending policies.

Then it'll probably happen all over again in the 2020's. [/QUOTE]

 

[deception]

Umm, did you miss the repeal of Glass-Steagall? And it's not just in an economic textbook. How do you think this country emerged from the deep recession of the early 1980s?

and americans were back in recession mode at the end of bush sr. tenure. then clinton showed up with his socialist policies and america enjoyed a surplus as well as breakneck growth where fast food joints where using signing bonuses to lure candidates.

 

[maxiep]

and americans were back in recession mode at the end of bush sr. tenure. then clinton showed up with his socialist policies and america enjoyed a surplus as well as breakneck growth where fast food joints where using signing bonuses to lure candidates.

Yeah, you have to hate those 10 year prosperity runs.

And you're misinformed about Clinton. It was only after he limited Welfare and cut taxes did the economy improve. It's one of the reasons I liked him as a President. He put effectiveness over ideology.

 

[Denny Crane]

The press is reporting that Obama walked on water over the weekend. They wouldn't report otherwise, because they don't want to be called un-american and put on an enemies list.

 

[deception]

The press is reporting that Obama walked on water over the weekend. They wouldn't report otherwise, because they don't want to be called un-american and put on an enemies list.

do u watch cnn? they have been unrelenting in recent weeks in their attacks from the gates thing to the healthcare debate. in fact, all they do is air those attack ads funded by the kleptocrats

 

[porky88]

The press is reporting that Obama walked on water over the weekend. They wouldn't report otherwise, because they don't want to be called un-american and put on an enemies list.

The most watched 24/7 news network is FOX and all they're still using Bush talking points so I think the bias is about 50-50. Each network has their own agenda.

Personally, CNN has done a respectable job I think so far. Of course compared to the other two all you have to do is be somewhat objective and you'll win out.

maxiep,

The downfall of the economy under Bush was that he didn't raise taxes during wartime. Even Ronald Reagan raised taxes a few times I believe. Bush just gave into the oil tycoons and all the other corporate businessman that helped get him elected. He was a terrible President no doubt and I don't think history is going to benefit him like it had Truman.

I hope we're not starting a trend where the country elects bad President after bad President. I believe after Lincoln there were some pretty bad ones for quite a while. Perhaps history is repeating itself.

I think the spending helped to some extent, but the problem is the spending that was needed was also used to get through a bunch of projects that are BS. That extra pork or whatever they call it was the problem.

That 2nd spending bill was a complete joke and I'm surprised it's not talked about as much as it is.

 

[Denny Crane]

The media is cable news only?

 

[maxiep]

maxiep,

The downfall of the economy under Bush was that he didn't raise taxes during wartime. Even Ronald Reagan raised taxes a few times I believe. Bush just gave into the oil tycoons and all the other corporate businessman that helped get him elected. He was a terrible President no doubt and I don't think history is going to benefit him like it had Truman.

The downfall of this economy was the idea that everyone--regardless of ability to pay--had the right to own a home. MBS was supposed to be a quiet financial backwater. Sub-prime mortgages changed all that. No one cared about the risks because the portfolio was going to be sold off. And if they went belly up, the GSE's had the implied backing of the Federal Government. The rating agencies were played off each other to secure great ratings for crap product. Derivatives were created that only the physicists and financial engineers on the trading floors truly understood. The traders and those responsible for asset allocation at the banks didn't understand these products at all.

I think rather than raising taxes after 9/11, what should have occurred was a contraction of the Federal Government. Use the spending on the war to curtail some of the programs that had ballooned out of control. Instead, the Bush Administration allowed it to mushroom.

So, you had massive consumer debt AND massive government debt. People were taking their increasing equity in their houses and swapping it for debt and flat screen TVs. Eventually, we were going to run out of money or we'd lose the ability to pay. As for residential real estate, values could only go so high as income growth. When it becomes impossible to buy a home and pay the mortgage, then values collapse. It was a classic recipe for a structural recession.

I hope we're not starting a trend where the country elects bad President after bad President. I believe after Lincoln there were some pretty bad ones for quite a while. Perhaps history is repeating itself.

I think the spending helped to some extent, but the problem is the spending that was needed was also used to get through a bunch of projects that are BS. That extra pork or whatever they call it was the problem.

That 2nd spending bill was a complete joke and I'm surprised it's not talked about as much as it is.[/QUOTE]

 

[Denny Crane]

I think the downfall of the economy was govt. spending on medicare drug program.

 

[porky88]

The media is cable news only?

FOX is a machine. It's on all day. The others on basic cable are half hour programs. Newspapers are falling fast in favor of the internet and you can find anything to agree with your point on the net. I think most people are ignorant and go to sites that agree with their views anyways.

The only way to get actual news is to get it yourself, but your kidding yourself if you think Obama doesn't have his critics as well as people kissing his ass. It works both ways.

 

[Denny Crane]

I think Obama came into office with a lot of support and he's lost much of it. The polling data shows his negatives are rapidly increasing while his support is below what it was on election day. It's easy enough to chalk it up to politics as usual, but this guy ran on changing the politics as usual. And I think it's quite clear that it is his actions that have led to this decline in popularity.

 

[RipCity]

What a crock of shit.

Obama has done NOTHING for the economy or unemployment rates, anyone who believes he has is an absolute idiot and incapable of doing any sort of unbiased research, clearly the OP fits that bill to the letter.

 

[porky88]

I think Obama came into office with a lot of support and he's lost much of it. The polling data shows his negatives are rapidly increasing while his support is below what it was on election day. It's easy enough to chalk it up to politics as usual, but this guy ran on changing the politics as usual. And I think it's quite clear that it is his actions that have led to this decline in popularity.

Clearly his popularity is falling, but because we're in a recession and Americans are impatient. Once the recession ends, his popularity will rise and most Americans will credit him regardless of whether or not his policies had to do with the recovery. That's why it's politics. If the recession ends and his approval rating is still dropping, then you're onto something.

 

[deception]

What a crock of shit.

Obama has done NOTHING for the economy or unemployment rates, any who believes he has is an absolute idiot and incapable of doing any sort of unbiased research, clearly the OP fits that bill to the letter.

how do u manage to post your insightful commentary in between attending your white supremacist meeting and indulging your meth habit?

 

[RipCity]

how do u manage to post your insightful commentary in between attending your white supremacist meeting and indulging your meth habit?

Oh I see, so me being Anti-Obama has absolutely nothing to do with politics, it's clearly because I'm a racist and apparently a meth addict?

 

[deception]

Oh I see, so me being Anti-Obama has absolutely nothing to do with politics, it's clearly because I'm a racist and apparently a meth addict?

exactly. i actually appreciate denny crane pov because his arguments are cogent and he tries to be even handed.

 

[RipCity]

I know this might be a total shocker to you, but most Americans could care less that he's black. We care about the job he does running our country, something he is currently doing in a piss poor fashion.

 

[deception]

I know this might be a total shocker to you, but most Americans could care less that he's black. We care about the job he does running our country, something he is currently doing in a piss poor fashion.

clearly there is a militaristic side to these protests. heck, a dude was brandishing a handgun yesterday outside the stadium where obama was speaking at. its no coincidence that virtually all the protestors are old and white. to that end, 42% of republicans believe obama was born in kenya.

 

[Eastoff]

clearly there is a militaristic side to these protests. heck, a dude was brandishing a handgun yesterday outside the stadium where obama was speaking at. its no coincidence that virtually all the protestors are old and white. to that end, 42% of republicans believe obama was born in kenya.

that clearly has nothing to do with racism

I'm going to make statements about how i have done research and think obama is doing a wonderful job without posting any of my "facts" to back it up. (i like your play book ripcity)

 

[maxiep]

Oh I see, so me being Anti-Obama has absolutely nothing to do with politics, it's clearly because I'm a racist and apparently a meth addict?

It's called an ad hominem attack. deception uses it when he can't defend his silly positions, which is pretty much all the time.

 

[RipCity]

Militaristic side of the protests? A man brandishing a handgun makes these protests militaristic? Or maybe there was just a nut job in the crowd who had a gun? There is nothing militaristic about these protests. Furthermore, these protests are NOT "domestic terrorism" as you claim.

For the definition of a Domestic Terrorist, I suggest you google Bill Ayers.

I'd also like to point out that you are not defending really any of your points. Basicly you post some bullshit, I annihilate it with these little things called facts, then you move on to your next misguided point.