Economic news

Stonewall · Jan 31, 2013

Initial jobless claims increased by 38,000 to a seasonally adjusted 368,000 in the week ended Jan. 26.

GDP reports stagnation and contraction for 4th Q 2012.

Obamacare, tax increases, indecision, lack of leadership.

It's not working. Blame Bush or Republicans or whomever you'd like.....this Democrat sitting in the White House today couldn't run a fever during flu season.

I'd like to thank who elected these incompetents to their offices and you reap what you sow. Unfortunately, your fellow Americans must suffer under the complete inability of the Obama Administration as well.

If you voted for Obama, raise your hand, I'd like to see you out there.

tecoyah · Jan 31, 2013

I wonder how many of the new claims were ex-govenment workers.

Aren't you for a smaller Government?

Stonewall · Jan 31, 2013

I wonder why some don't focus on the fact that jobless claims continue at staggering numbers, unemployment remains unacceptably high, and businesses are quite unsure STILL about coming taxes and this colossal disaster known as Obamacare.

David · Feb 1, 2013

Stonewall said:
I wonder why some don't focus on the fact that jobless claims continue at staggering numbers, unemployment remains unacceptably high, and businesses are quite unsure STILL about coming taxes and this colossal disaster known as Obamacare.

Unless you're looking for 100% employment, it's not that bad.

Stonewall · Feb 2, 2013

David said:
Unless you're looking for 100% employment, it's not that bad.

Just ticked up to 7.9% and that's much too high. And certain demographics supposedly targeted by government policies are seeing double digit unemployment. I can appreciate looking at the cup as half full rather than half empty however, many are in denial seemingly unable to criticize current policy that obviously isn't working. And is it because many cannot admit the President's policies are an abysmal failure?

myp · Feb 2, 2013

Stonewall said:
Just ticked up to 7.9% and that's much too high. And certain demographics supposedly targeted by government policies are seeing double digit unemployment. I can appreciate looking at the cup as half full rather than half empty however, many are in denial seemingly unable to criticize current policy that obviously isn't working. And is it because many cannot admit the President's policies are an abysmal failure?

Fiscal policy is hurting the recovery, you are right. We should not be debating over a silly debt ceiling, it should have been abolished long ago. We should not be questioning the Fed independence and threatening to restrict it or tie it more to politics, we should have learned that long ago. We should not be debating greater austerity right now, we should have learned what that means to recovery from Greece and company. So yes, fiscal policy happenings are to blame. But it hardly falls on any one party or person- it is both sides.

misterveritis · Feb 2, 2013

tecoyah said:
I wonder how many of the new claims were ex-govenment workers.

Aren't you for a smaller Government?

Yes. Much smaller. Let's empty the education department and the EPA for starters.

misterveritis · Feb 2, 2013

What is a Democrat with a brain called?

Stonewall said:
I wonder why some don't focus on the fact that jobless claims continue at staggering numbers, unemployment remains unacceptably high, and businesses are quite unsure STILL about coming taxes and this colossal disaster known as Obamacare.

Well, it is because of democrats had any brains they would likely be Republicans.

misterveritis · Feb 2, 2013

David said:
Unless you're looking for 100% employment, it's not that bad.

Let us hope that you will be one of Obama's 8%.

misterveritis · Feb 2, 2013

Stonewall said:
Just ticked up to 7.9% and that's much too high. And certain demographics supposedly targeted by government policies are seeing double digit unemployment. I can appreciate looking at the cup as half full rather than half empty however, many are in denial seemingly unable to criticize current policy that obviously isn't working. And is it because many cannot admit the President's policies are an abysmal failure?

What do you mean? Keeping the poor poor worked wonderfully for Franklin Delano Roosevelt. And it has worked equally well for Franklin Delano Obama.

He got re-elected, after all. It is hard to beat Santa Claus. And what a plan! Steal vast sums of money from your political enemies, you know, the productive, and give that loot to the unproductive, the Democratic base.

tecoyah · Feb 3, 2013

misterveritis said:
Yes. Much smaller. Let's empty the education department and the EPA for starters.

Yeah....whats the point of teaching our kids, when they will just die of mercury poisoning anyway.

Stonewall · Feb 3, 2013

myp said:
Fiscal policy is hurting the recovery, you are right. We should not be debating over a silly debt ceiling, it should have been abolished long ago.

Extending the debt ceiling are such policies that are hurting recovery and yes we very much should be debating these issues, they're at the heart of our current roadblocks as far as sound economic policy is concerned.

We should not be questioning the Fed independence and threatening to restrict it or tie it more to politics, we should have learned that long ago.

What about the independence of the consumer to choose health coverage?

We should not be debating greater austerity right now, we should have learned what that means to recovery from Greece and company. So yes, fiscal policy happenings are to blame. But it hardly falls on any one party or person- it is both sides.

Big government outdated policies are what we should be debating. Taxes, debt, deficit, health care, entitlements, and runaway discretionary spending. Plus the kneejerk need to toss money at every cultural decay our media deems necessary.

myp · Feb 3, 2013

Stonewall said:
Extending the debt ceiling are such policies that are hurting recovery and yes we very much should be debating these issues, they're at the heart of our current roadblocks as far as sound economic policy is concerned.

The debt ceiling hurts us. The recovery is a short to possibly medium term problem. The debt is possibly a long term problem. You need to solve the short term problem first or the short term problem gets kicked down the road and makes the long term problem worse- that is your stalling recovery. The market very clearly doesn't like the fiscal cliff or debt ceiling type of nonsense. Numbers don't lie.

Stonewall said:
What about the independence of the consumer to choose health coverage?

What does this have to do with Fed independence?

Stonewall said:
Big government outdated policies are what we should be debating. Taxes, debt, deficit, health care, entitlements, and runaway discretionary spending. Plus the kneejerk need to toss money at every cultural decay our media deems necessary.

You phrase everything so broadly and politically. It isn't that simple. And thankfully in this area (unlike guns) depending on the particular issue we do have the data to support it through macro studies. Also, I am talking in the context of recovery and I think you are just making general responses.

Stonewall · Feb 3, 2013

myp said:
The debt ceiling hurts us.

And thus is a credible and necessary debate to have, I agree.

The recovery is a short to possibly medium term problem.

I vehemently disagree, Sir! This recovery is not a short/medium term problem. Entitlements Sir, unfunded mandates are the dominate expense each and every year. 10,000 people a day retire, economic growth and prosperity required otherwise benefit/pension packages are affected(and we see the strife and chaos when these events are played out in the public in Wisconsin for example), our problem is very much long term myp. Shovel ready, short term, cash for clunkers, omnibus spending bills or stimulus packages packed with pork barrell projects and the once dreaded earmarks that were once an issue when Republicans had majorities, Quantitative Easing techniques by the Fed, ie...printing money out the wazoo, artificially suppressed interest rates encouraging even more money and/or debt...isn't working! I couldn't disagree with you more and believe your views here exactly the problem rather than the solution. Do I get infracted?

The debt is possibly a long term problem. You need to solve the short term problem first or the short term problem gets kicked down the road and makes the long term problem worse- that is your stalling recovery. The market very clearly doesn't like the fiscal cliff or debt ceiling type of nonsense. Numbers don't lie.

No numbers don't lie. Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, Obamacare, Food Stamps, Government Pension mandates, Housing, and other unfunded mandates that are the colossal cradle to grave monstrosity our government has become

What does this have to do with Fed independence?

Hey...he took Fed independence, school loans, the EPA claiming carbon is a threat to mankind, his Obamacare throttles over rights but I admit I made a joke there and didn't address Fed independence, my apologies for poor humor.

You phrase everything so broadly and politically. It isn't that simple. And thankfully in this area (unlike guns) depending on the particular issue we do have the data to support it through macro studies. Also, I am talking in the context of recovery and I think you are just making general responses.

You aren't talking in the context of recovery at all. You're dismissing debt debate, you're trying to explain that US economic growth is a short to medium term issue. It's no such thing. The long term unfunded mandates that is the size and scope of this government right now is the problem, is what drags on economic growth. Do you not see that?

myp · Feb 3, 2013

There are long and short-term markets. Bond rates are what matters. They show the market trusts UST, especially in the short and even in the long. Debt isn't an issue right now. The market (unemployment, GDP growth, etc.) also shows that in the current-short term we have issues we need to fix in order to allow for long-term growth. You can't stay in this quasi-recession state forever and expect prosperity. My opinion based on that is that we need to get to strong growth first, then worry about the debt, especially because the market trusts the debt right now.

And quantitative easing is good even from a monetary stability standpoint- in fact they should have done more. I am not a fan of fiscal stimulus- I agree with you there, but a NGDPLT on the monetary side could potentially do wonders.

tecoyah · Feb 3, 2013

Quite simply put...in real world terms, the U.S. stimulus has been effective at a scale far exceeding the austerity game overseas.

Anyone with facts available and an ability to understand economics MUST realize this.

Though I agree we can still invest, even in debt, we cannot do it stupidly.

Unfortunately, it seems we are pretty stupid right now due to incompetency and partisan BS.

Stonewall · Feb 3, 2013

Stimulus has been effective adding to the national debt and blowing deficits out of the water, you're right.

tecoyah · Feb 3, 2013

That you decide to focus on the accurate costs....rather than the accurate benefits has made it very clear you have no interest in actual debate.

Obviously, you have joined the right handed problem.

Unworthy of actual debate.

Yes....the stimulus was expensive.
Yes it seems to have prevented some very bad things.

Obama is not the antichrist.
Beohner is not a worthless chunk of flesh.

Until we the people stop being morons....they will keep doing it as well.

myp · Feb 3, 2013

My take: Obama's fiscal stimulus bill was not a good move- too much bad spending; the monetary stimulus (if we can even call it that given lower than target inflation) had been better, but should have been greater in amount. Fiscally, keeping taxes low was good, but more spending on basic research and infrastructure would have been better in my opinion- making cuts to the likes of NASA, the NIH, and the FDA is not what we want long-term.

tecoyah · Feb 3, 2013

myp said:
My take: Obama's fiscal stimulus bill was not a good move- too much bad spending; the monetary stimulus (if we can even call it that given lower than target inflation) had been better, but should have been greater in amount. Fiscally, keeping taxes low was good, but more spending on basic research and infrastructure would have been better in my opinion- making cuts to the likes of NASA, the NIH, and the FDA is not what we want long-term.

My opinion...the fiscal stimulus was the only logical move (unless someone had a better idea)....all spending is inherently bad and monetary spending is not something I can accurately discuss.

The opposition prevented further spending, the low taxation was effective, and infrastructure spending would have prevented the limited stimulus allowed.

As far as Nasa, NIH, FDA, or any other non defense program...it never had a chance.

Economic news

Similar threads