| Author: |
[Politics] Topic: People Not In Labor Force Soar By 522,000, Labor Force Participation Rate Lowest Since 1981 |
|
AcerRubrum |
RSI   View Space | Friends | Playbook | |
Veteran
Joined: Feb 2010
Posts: 2079
Location: |
#26 Posted: 5/7/2012 4:15:46 PM
but but but I thought IRAQI oil was going to pay for that war 
|
|
quote |
|
dl36 |
RSI  |
Covers Rehab
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 22645
Location: United States |
#27 Posted: 5/7/2012 4:37:39 PM QUOTE Originally Posted by 14daroad:
There is the concept of full employment which in our country I believe is to be assumed to be between 3.5-5% (UE).
I think it would be impossible to have 0% unemployment. I am guessing the economist said it would be bad because of inflationary pressures...
I appreciate you getting back to me no insulting or combative posting and no Spin or necessary hoopla...
So the concept of a total 0% employment is not impossible by highly improbable...
But if we go with your under 5% rate... then is this actually a good thing for the overall economy? I can get the people going back to work thing on an individual and collective basis... but in terms of actual prosperity do you think that employment rate actually as a real effect or is that the employment rate is a symptom or product of the economy?
|
|
quote |
|
dl36 |
RSI |
Covers Rehab
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 22645
Location: United States |
#28 Posted: 5/7/2012 4:40:31 PM QUOTE Originally Posted by AcerRubrum: Plus we have all the war debt Bush racked up to pay for,
but but but I thought IRAQI oil was going to pay for that war
you cant bring up or talk about Bush
 Certain poster's feelings get stepped on if you do
Please use the "kid gloves" for the sensitive posters
|
|
quote |
|
14daroad |
View Space | Blog | Friends | Playbook | |
Captain
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 7751
Location: Virginia |
#29 Posted: 5/7/2012 6:13:50 PM
|
|
quote |
|
14daroad |
View Space | Blog | Friends | Playbook | |
Captain
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 7751
Location: Virginia |
#30 Posted: 5/7/2012 6:18:28 PM QUOTE Originally Posted by dl36:
I appreciate you getting back to me no insulting or combative posting and no Spin or necessary hoopla...
So the concept of a total 0% employment is not impossible by highly improbable...
But if we go with your under 5% rate... then is this actually a good thing for the overall economy? I can get the people going back to work thing on an individual and collective basis... but in terms of actual prosperity do you think that employment rate actually as a real effect or is that the employment rate is a symptom or product of the economy?
dl36,
the last time we had an unemployment rate under 5% federal revenues were pouring in faster than the greedy politicians in Washington could spend them.
So yes, I do think having an U/E rate around 4% would be good for America.
But as to your question, the unemployment figures are just indicators (lagging ones at that) of the state of the economy. If the rate were lower it would be a sign of an expanding economy which would be good for America.
If things do start to change for the better, I think the federal government should work to ensure those millions of illegal immigrants that have left due to the bad economy don't get back in the country.
|
|
quote |
|
|
|
14daroad |
View Space | Blog | Friends | Playbook | |
Captain
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 7751
Location: Virginia |
#31 Posted: 5/7/2012 6:21:21 PM
Which "mess" would that be?
Bush created a world wide recession, really?
Plus we have all the war debt Bush racked up to pay for,
The Democrats supported, and increased spending on wars.
Further, what was spent in Iraq is Obama's yearly deficit.
|
|
quote |
|
14daroad |
View Space | Blog | Friends | Playbook | |
Captain
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 7751
Location: Virginia |
#32 Posted: 5/7/2012 6:27:30 PM QUOTE Originally Posted by AcerRubrum:
can you break that down 14daroad?
my son graduated 2011 Chemistry UWIS People's Republic of Madison and had a couple of options for a job...stayed in Madison
was wondering what the break down would look like
science vs liberal arts vs business etc etc etc
I don't know what the break down is. I just read that the unemployment rate for collge grads is down to 4%
Here is the article I got the figures from. And they make an interesting point, a lot of the college grads from '08 & '09 never found jobs and/or are underemployed so they are competing with the more recent grads for the same jobs.
|
|
quote |
|
wallstreetcappers |
View Space | Friends | Playbook | |
Covers Linesmen
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 47722
Location: United States |
#33 Posted: 5/7/2012 7:34:00 PM QUOTE Originally Posted by 14daroad: The actions of Obama wont start being his alone until the mess Bush created
Which "mess" would that be?
Bush created a world wide recession, really?
Plus we have all the war debt Bush racked up to pay for,
The Democrats supported, and increased spending on wars.Further, what was spent in Iraq is Obama's yearly deficit.
Of course they supported it, they were fed intentionally wrong information by a certain group, it would be similar to you buying a car that had the odometer rolled back and you didnt know it.
And the concept of excessive speculation and leverage is exactly why there are multiple countries in the same position with others in it now but not realizing it.
Banks across the world leveraged to the hilt and multiple economies have their housing markets crumbling for the identical reason.
And yes the bubble inflation and deflation occurred on Bush's watch. |
|
quote |
|
14daroad |
View Space | Blog | Friends | Playbook | |
Captain
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 7751
Location: Virginia |
#34 Posted: 5/7/2012 7:46:51 PM
----------------------
I bet they were! And I bet you have all sorts of facts to demonstrate it too!
And yes the bubble inflation and deflation occurred on Bush's watch.
-----------------------
Which is meaningless. The stimulus failed on Obama's watch.
You're blaming him, right?
Oh, and here is what was going on with the housing bubble on Bush's watch:
Capitol Hill bore down on Mr. Mudd as well. The same year he took the
top position, regulators sharply increased Fannie’s affordable-housing
goals. Democratic lawmakers demanded that the company buy more loans
that had been made to low-income and minority homebuyers.
Remember, government is benevolent, liberals are good, and Republicans are to blame for everything.
|
|
quote |
|
14daroad |
View Space | Blog | Friends | Playbook | |
Captain
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 7751
Location: Virginia |
#35 Posted: 5/7/2012 7:48:19 PM
==================
Perhaps you could explain why the intelligence agency of every Western government believed Saddam had WMD's and in fact it was the official policy of the US government that Saddam had WMD's prior to Bush ever being a candidate for President then?
|
|
quote |
|
14daroad |
View Space | Blog | Friends | Playbook | |
Captain
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 7751
Location: Virginia |
#36 Posted: 5/7/2012 7:57:09 PM
======================
The fact that you and your ilk continue with this silly "Bush lied" meme almost 4 years after he left office is kind of pathetic.
Anyway, I've always enjoyed this:
EDWARDS: Well, the first thing I should say is I take responsibility
for my vote. Period. And I did what I did based upon a belief, Chris,
that Saddam Hussein’s potential for getting nuclear capability was what
created the threat. That was always the focus of my concern. Still is
the focus of my concern.
So did I get misled? No. I didn’t get misled.
MATTHEWS: Did you get an honest reading on the intelligence?
EDWRADS: But now we’re getting to the second part of your question.
I think we have to get to the bottom of this. I think there’s clear
inconsistency between what’s been found in Iraq and what we were told.
And as you know, I serve on the Senate Intelligence Committee. So it
wasn’t just the Bush administration. I sat in meeting after meeting
after meeting where we were told about the presence of weapons of mass
destruction.
==================
|
|
quote |
|
14daroad |
View Space | Blog | Friends | Playbook | |
Captain
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 7751
Location: Virginia |
#37 Posted: 5/7/2012 8:03:32 PM
By Bill Clinton?
Clinton told King: "People can quarrel with whether we should have more
troops in Afghanistan or internationalize Iraq or whatever, but it is
incontestable that on the day I left office, there were unaccounted for
stocks of biological and chemical weapons."
|
|
quote |
|
wallstreetcappers |
View Space | Friends | Playbook | |
Covers Linesmen
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 47722
Location: United States |
#38 Posted: 5/7/2012 8:52:41 PM QUOTE Originally Posted by 14daroad:
hey were fed intentionally wrong information by a certain group, it
would be similar to you buying a car that had the odometer rolled back
and you didnt know it.
==================
Perhaps you could explain why the intelligence agency of every Western government believed Saddam had WMD's and in fact it was the official policy of the US government that Saddam had WMD's prior to Bush ever being a candidate for President then?
So collusion means what to you exactly?
I dont recall Clinton having the idea of invading Iraq or doing so, I do recall Bush I getting his face rubbed in crap via Iraq though.
So did you think Iraq had WMD's that could harm this country back when this was unfolding?
I did not..many people did not, and there was absolutely nothing found..nothing even remotely close to confirmation.
So congress was duped, many people were duped..if the source of information is not transparent how can you verify if the information is legit or not?
Does that even make sense to you? |
|
quote |
|
wallstreetcappers |
View Space | Friends | Playbook | |
Covers Linesmen
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 47722
Location: United States |
#39 Posted: 5/7/2012 8:55:10 PM QUOTE Originally Posted by 14daroad:
they were fed intentionally wrong information by a certain group,
By Bill Clinton?
Clinton told King: "People can quarrel with whether we should have more
troops in Afghanistan or internationalize Iraq or whatever, but it is
incontestable that on the day I left office, there were unaccounted for
stocks of biological and chemical weapons."
What would happen if influential politicians started undermining the leader of the country?
Do I think Clinton believes that crap? No..because if he did then we would have taken action against Iraq under his watch.
Clinton is a diplomatic politician, it is not likely you would ever see him bash a sitting president even if he felt it was warranted.
|
|
quote |
|
be easy |
View Space | Blog | Friends | Playbook | |
MVP
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 15378
Location: Pennsylvania |
#40 Posted: 5/8/2012 8:23:43 AM QUOTE Originally Posted by wallstreetcappers:
Of course they supported it, they were fed intentionally wrong information by a certain group, it would be similar to you buying a car that had the odometer rolled back and you didnt know it.
And the concept of excessive speculation and leverage is exactly why there are multiple countries in the same position with others in it now but not realizing it.
Banks across the world leveraged to the hilt and multiple economies have their housing markets crumbling for the identical reason.
And yes the bubble inflation and deflation occurred on Bush's watch.
FALSE
the housing bubble was born in the 1990's
housing markets are not crumbling, they are correcting. A return to normalcy is exactly what the economy needs before we can begin to think about getting things moving again. Until all that bad housing debt is purged, zero chance of any meaningful recovery, and luckily for us, there is zero chance of those insane bubble prices of the last decade, of ever returning. The headwinds that house prices face are many, and it is silly to wish for higher prices when they benefit virtually no one, and once the herd understands that a house is shelter, and is not an investment because it provides no return, they will treat it as it ought be, like any other (necesity) consumption item.
prices are in search of rental parity. you can't go to the bank and get a loan to pay your rent, so that is why rents are the yardstick. Rents come from incomes, which have also been trampled
first we will need a return of jobs/wages/incomes
then house prices will settle in the range of
100 x monthly rent
2.5x annual income
it is virtually impossible to fathom a recovery, until the zombie banks are allowed to realize their insolvency. Those TBTF banks make up the entirety of our financial system, and they are all dead man walking
please stop spreading your lies, maybe if you took an objective look at your love affair with clinton, and your hatred for bush, you might begin to see things as they really are
|
|
quote |
|
14daroad |
View Space | Blog | Friends | Playbook | |
Captain
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 7751
Location: Virginia |
#41 Posted: 5/8/2012 8:35:46 AM Jay Leno: jobs Obama created are as imaginary as his girlfriend
|
|
quote |
|
14daroad |
View Space | Blog | Friends | Playbook | |
Captain
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 7751
Location: Virginia |
#42 Posted: 5/8/2012 8:38:36 AM QUOTE Originally Posted by wallstreetcappers:
What would happen if influential politicians started undermining the leader of the country?
Do I think Clinton believes that crap? No..because if he did then we would have taken action against Iraq under his watch.
Clinton is a diplomatic politician, it is not likely you would ever see him bash a sitting president even if he felt it was warranted.
You mean "influential politicians" like Democrats in the Senate claiming they were "lied to" when Bush was still in office?
Are you seriously suggesting Clinton didn't bomb Iraq or say Iraq had WMD when he was in office?
|
|
quote |
|
be easy |
View Space | Blog | Friends | Playbook | |
MVP
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 15378
Location: Pennsylvania |
#43 Posted: 5/8/2012 8:44:59 AM 
|
|
quote |
|
14daroad |
View Space | Blog | Friends | Playbook | |
Captain
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 7751
Location: Virginia |
#44 Posted: 5/8/2012 8:46:56 AM QUOTE Originally Posted by wallstreetcappers:
So collusion means what to you exactly?
I dont recall Clinton having the idea of invading Iraq or doing so, I do recall Bush I getting his face rubbed in crap via Iraq though.
So did you think Iraq had WMD's that could harm this country back when this was unfolding?
I did not..many people did not, and there was absolutely nothing found..nothing even remotely close to confirmation.
So congress was duped, many people were duped..if the source of information is not transparent how can you verify if the information is legit or not?
Does that even make sense to you?
No it doesn't make sense, it is incoherent.
Every Western government, all of them, in addition to Jordan, Egypt, and Saudi Arabia all believe Iraq had WMD prior to Bush ever running for President.
You pretending that this is "collusion" is silly and absurd.
You pretending Bush "lied" is silly and absurd.
As to your assertion that "nothing was found" you are either being dishonest or simply ignorant of the facts.
Chemical Weapons Found in Iraq
Iraqi Chemical Stash Uncovered
The removal of 550 metric tons of "yellowcake" — the seed material for higher-grade nuclear enrichment — was a significant step toward closing the books on Saddam's nuclear legacy.
=====================
Honestly, I don't know why I post these facts as you're revealing to be not at all interested in them. Your response to them will now be that what was found was not Bush said there was.
Or to ignore them.
|
|
quote |
|
14daroad |
View Space | Blog | Friends | Playbook | |
Captain
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 7751
Location: Virginia |
#45 Posted: 5/8/2012 8:56:17 AM And yes the bubble inflation and deflation occurred on Bush's watch.
===========================
The bubble inflation occurred on Clinton's watch too.
I've already provided you one link to the NYT piece detailing how Democrats pressured Fannie & Freddie to make more loans (note that Bush tried to put more oversight on those agencies starting in 2003 and Democrats fought it endlessly.
Here are more examples:
In 1995, President Bill Clinton's HUD agreed to let Fannie and Freddie get affordable-housing credit for buying subprime securities that included loans to low-income borrowers. The idea was that subprime lending benefited many borrowers who did not qualify for conventional loans.
Another:
Andrew Cuomo, the youngest Housing and Urban Development secretary in history, made a series of decisions between 1997 and 2001 that gave birth to the country's current crisis. He took actions that—in combination with many other factors—helped plunge Fannie and Freddie into the subprime markets without putting in place the means to monitor their increasingly risky investments.
=================================
Remember, government is benevolent, liberals are good, and Republicans are to blame for everything.
|
|
quote |
|
esplanade |
View Space | Friends | Playbook | |
Captain
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 8023
Location: |
#46 Posted: 5/8/2012 10:02:36 AM
Recession started on Bubba's watch. (Read up on Clinton's recession)
9/11 terrorists set up shop on Clinton's watch.
Clinton had 8-10 verifiable chances to take out OBL but passed.
What's the point?
Wall has an innate desire to blame Reagan & Bush for everything.
Not just a desire, but a deep need.
|
|
quote |
|
thirdperson |
RSI  |
Veteran
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 1018
Location: |
#47 Posted: 5/8/2012 10:57:43 AM |
|
quote |
|
wallstreetcappers |
View Space | Friends | Playbook | |
Covers Linesmen
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 47722
Location: United States |
#48 Posted: 5/8/2012 11:20:59 AM QUOTE Originally Posted by 14daroad:
You mean "influential politicians" like Democrats in the Senate claiming they were "lied to" when Bush was still in office?
Are you seriously suggesting Clinton didn't bomb Iraq or say Iraq had WMD when he was in office?
Did Clinton invade Iraq or take serious action?
I dont care what he said in public to protect the institution, that has always been his approach.
So did Clinton invade Iraq? of course if he thought they had WMDs which could harm the US then of course he would have stopped it, right? |
|
quote |
|
wallstreetcappers |
View Space | Friends | Playbook | |
Covers Linesmen
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 47722
Location: United States |
#49 Posted: 5/8/2012 11:27:32 AM
As usual you follow the repub/conservative line of thinking regarding equal opp housing and the bubble. So since Clinton was involved with equal opp that he was responsible for the bubble. I completely disagree and we have gone through this so many times in the past it is probably not worth doing again.
I owned a house through both of the presidents in question and I dont recall seeing a doubling of housing prices where I lived during the middle to late 90s, nor into the early 2000s.
I do recall seeing the paper value of my house in PHX double during the mid Bush years, and the area I lived in really wasnt even the worst in regards to price inflation..actually the area underperformed.
I have always suggested that bubbles come from leverage, not from equal opp housing initiatives. The reason housing came crashing down in dramatic fashion was not due to equal opp lending, rather loose lending practices across all demographics and monster leveraging.
If what you suggest was true then the upper end of the price range which were not equal opp lenders would have survived, that is the exact opposite and still is the case here. This market has bounced off the lows nicely but the high end price point has actually not participated as the demand curve is not as active as the lower price point (which was my contention back when we discussed this before). |
|
quote |
|
14daroad |
View Space | Blog | Friends | Playbook | |
Captain
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 7751
Location: Virginia |
#50 Posted: 5/8/2012 1:00:16 PM QUOTE Originally Posted by wallstreetcappers:
Did Clinton invade Iraq or take serious action?
I dont care what he said in public to protect the institution, that has always been his approach.
So did Clinton invade Iraq? of course if he thought they had WMDs which could harm the US then of course he would have stopped it, right?
Operation Desert Fox certainly was serious. And Clinton claimed he launched Operation Desert Fox to stop the proliferation of Iraq's WMD programs. So your point is, what now?
So now you're reduced to basically saying Clinton didn't believe Iraq really had any weapons, or if they did, they would never use them.
Note, your claim that Bush "fed intentionally wrong information" has no validity, or basis in fact. |
|
quote |