Comments on: Unemployment Numbers Should Not Sap Momentum For New Job Creation Spending

By: mk3872

mk3872 — Sat, 05 Dec 2009 06:42:59 +0000

Well said … but as unemployment moves back to 8-9% in 2010, should put as levels that the Chinese and other holders of our debt are comfortable with.

Personally, I would like to see more military cut-backs in Iraq sooner than mid-2010 and the HCR changes to take effect sooner.

Those alone will help with the deficit, but not cut it enough.

I am worried that we’ll see tax cuts for businesses and capital gains, which will have the same effect of raising our deficit by cuttting our revenues.

By: mk3872

mk3872 — Sat, 05 Dec 2009 06:39:45 +0000

Riiight … everything is Obama’s fault. And that $800B bill to push funding into state projects has absolutely nothing to do with employment.

Do you happen to get all of your deep introspective financial insights from Fox Business News & CNBC ? … LOL!

By: TarheelDem

TarheelDem — Fri, 04 Dec 2009 18:39:23 +0000

There are ways of reducing the deficit (and debt) without destroying jobs. Taxes on financial transactions is one. Restoring the tax rate structure that existed in 1954 is another. Cutting military spending on non-Iraq and non-Afghanistan items to cover the costs of those wars is another.

The fact is that at the moment, the debt is financed at relatively low interest rates. And a substantial part of the deficit is coming from war and the loss of revenue due to the Bush tax cuts and current unemployment.

Yes those are downsides, but moving to deal with unemployment will cause our creditors to have more confidence in our ability to pay. Pursuing draconian austerity will drive the economy deeper into a hole and reduce our ability to pay off those debts — and even cause political instability that could endanger their receiving anything at all.

The fiscal scolds have a very simple-minded argument. Those who pretend to be economists among them should return their degrees.

By: STTPinOhio

STTPinOhio — Fri, 04 Dec 2009 18:37:34 +0000

Still, the raw numbers should resist any call of this as good news

No, a lower unemployment rate and losing 100,000 fewer jobs than expected is in fact good news. That's not to say "Mission Accomplished" or anything, but it is good news.

By: fuckno

fuckno — Fri, 04 Dec 2009 17:52:56 +0000

Bilderberg is such a, by force of fact, clandestine description. DLC, or Centrist, or Corporatist works just fine.

By: georgewalton

georgewalton — Fri, 04 Dec 2009 17:29:29 +0000

Job losses have slowed to almost a HALT since Obama took office.

Yet FDL libs still whine & complain that he’s not “progressive” enough

Anything that happened in the job market has occured despite Obama’s policies not because of them. Rescuing Main Street was never the focus of his economic team. And look at the jobs that are being created. They pay a lot less and the job security folks have holding them is minimal.

Wall Street wants a new “normal” unemployment rate at between 8 and 10 percent. Why? Because it gives employers more leverage when negociating wages and benefits with employees.

And with Obama they will get it.

Obama is Bilderberg through and through. And if you don’t understand what that means for working and middleclass folks in America google Bilderberg and find out.

By: fuckno

fuckno — Fri, 04 Dec 2009 17:25:29 +0000

Been there, done that. I’ll just wait for the revised numbers, thank you very much.

By: TarheelDem

TarheelDem — Fri, 04 Dec 2009 16:45:46 +0000

It’s not the data that is bogus, it’s the assertion that less bad constitutes good. It is technically improvement. But that takes a special parsing and does not reflect the reality that folks are experiencing.

Moreover, the happy talk (not the data) provides aid and comfort to the fiscal scolds (and Ben Bernanke), who are indeed in the Wall Street-DC Beltway bubble.

By: TarheelDem

TarheelDem — Fri, 04 Dec 2009 16:40:41 +0000

I have a favor to ask of you. It will take about 5 minutes. Call your Senators, and even Republicans on this one, and ask them to vote No on the reconfirmation of Ben Bernanke as chair of the Fed.

Yesterday’s testimony proved beyond a doubt that he is not competent to continue in his position.

By: oldtree

oldtree — Fri, 04 Dec 2009 16:36:39 +0000

It is irresponsible to report as fact the figures the government gives out for unemployment figures. They have not been correct in the last 2 years, and a further report that comes out in the next couple days will contradict the report they use today.
Does no one remember how many times that the two or 3 different reporting agencies have differed on these reports? In the last 2 years, these reports have never agreed, and the rosy colored half full glass has turned out to be an old cup that is more than half empty.

You are reporting bullshit government propaganda as though it were fact Dave, what’s up with that? The job losses are continuing and every state reports declines, but only in the fantasy world of the beltway do they equate increases in jobs with the stated losses reported to them by the states.

What are you on about?