Return to the Hot Topics Forum | Post a Follow-Up

 o
What, no outrage?

Posted by mrskjun 9 (My Page) on
Sat, Feb 2, 13 at 17:13

The economy contracted last quarter, unemployment clicked up, food stamp rolls grew, gasoline has jumped 25 cents a gallon in the last week. Where is the outrage?


Follow-Up Postings:

 o
RE: What, no outrage?

And the Dow's over 14,000.

-Ron-


 o
RE: What, no outrage?

Housing starts the highest since June 2008.....


 o
RE: What, no outrage?

And there was a major hurricane during that period in one of (if not the) busiest economic areas of the country.


 o
RE: What, no outrage?

the dow is up because people are pulling money from bank investments due to very low earningh rates and putting it ino the market in a hunt for SOME kinda return. Businesses, instead of expanding or retooling and adding jobs are investing in the market. You can see it everywhere.


 o
RE: What, no outrage?

the dow is up because people are pulling money from bank investments due to very low earningh rates and putting it ino the market in a hunt for SOME kinda return. Businesses, instead of expanding or retooling and adding jobs are investing in the market. You can see it everywhere.

I don't know whether to laugh or cry.

-Ron-


 o
RE: What, no outrage?

The DOW is over 14,000...do you think people are investing in food stamps?


 o
RE: What, no outrage?

GDP down because of a sharp drop in government spending and private inventory reduction. Government spending down, economy contracts - simple as that.

Of course there is no fake outrage or pretend bombast from Faux because then they would have to explain why.


 o
RE: What, no outrage?

Just laugh Ron.

I am outraged YES, YES. I am outrageously happy Obama Won the election ......4 more years. Then Hilary.


 o
RE: What, no outrage?

There are clear reasons for the change. Is outrage necessary?


 o
RE: What, no outrage?

I am also outrageously delighted that Obama was reelected and if Hillary runs, I'll knock on doors to make she is the next resident of the WH.


 o
RE: What, no outrage?

Cattle futures, travel records, Benghazi...bring it on!


 o
RE: What, no outrage?

Trouble is Demi the majority of Americans are liberal leaning and the numbers are growing. Those old news stories didn't matter then and they surely won't matter in four years.

Conservatives need to move to the centre and be seen as more inclusive or they will be toast.......the conservative movement is shrinking . Time for a wake up call.


 o
RE: What, no outrage?

yes, its hard to beat santa clause.


 o
RE: What, no outrage?

I agree, with that level of argument, you couldn't even beat the Tooth Fairy...

and therein rests the problem with conservatives....until they engage in a positive and moderate way they will continue to lose ground. A choice many seem ok with.......all the better for liberals.


 o
RE: What, no outrage?

yes, its hard to beat santa clause the party that cares about all Americans, not just the 1%

Fixed that for you.


 o
RE: What, no outrage?

Well heck jill...as soon as we run all the grannies off the cliff and starve all the children, we'll all be in high cotton don't you know?


 o
RE: What, no outrage?

I would suggest stocks in Ruger, S&W and any ammunition company. I'm liking oil too.


 o
RE: What, no outrage?

Mrskjun wrote,

Well heck jill...as soon as we run all the grannies off the cliff and starve all the children, we'll all be in high cotton don't you know?

It was your candidate who, in a moment of rare candor, said his job was not to worry about needy people in those groups.


 o
RE: What, no outrage?

.until they engage in a positive and moderate way they will continue to lose ground.

Absolutely.

I have friends that are still working they are watching their 401K increase and gaining after the huge lost under Bush. They thought they were going to have to work longer to afford retirement. It is personal, they have good jobs, receiving raises and they are able to plan their retirement.

When people are living in reality and not the GOP Fear, Hate, Doom and Gloom it is not a believable or effective tactic. Do they think everyone is illiterate and mathematically challenged? That illiterate plan only works with the illiterate.

You can wish bad for the country and your fellow Americans but if it does not happen what is their next plan?


 o
RE: What, no outrage?

Well, it's not all grannies and all children. Only those 47% takers, as Romney said. Thankfully, MrsK, your party keeps losing, so I don't see that happening anytime soon.


 o
RE: What, no outrage?

In the weakest recovery since the Great Depression, most of the reduction in unemployment from its 10.0 percent peak in October 2009 has been accomplished through a significant drop in the percentage of adults working or looking for work. Were adult labor-force participation the same today, the unemployment rate would be 9.9 percent, and were the participation rate the same as when President Obama took office it would be more than 10 percent.

Here is a link that might be useful: link


 o
RE: What, no outrage?

Well, it's not all grannies and all children.

Why do they hate our brave soldiers?


 o
RE: What, no outrage?

Government contributions to the economy keep falling and more than offsetting growth in private sector. Wait until all those active and reserve military personnel and their bases are eliminated. Going to great for the economy.


 o
RE: What, no outrage?

Where is the outrage?

Isn't it time to come to terms with the fact that President Obama won the election by 5 Million votes, is our President and will be for the next four years ?
Gas prices? Really?


 o
RE: What, no outrage?

Isn't it time to come to terms with the fact that President Obama won the election by 5 Million votes, is our President and will be for the next four years ?

Pathetic wailing. Enjoy it, but don't forget to get their fainting couch for them.


 o
RE: What, no outrage?

Wait until all those active and reserve military personnel and their bases are eliminated.

Yes when they return the health care is also going to sap the economy. The Bush years will be with us for many years to come. Fighting two wars and looking for those elusive Weapons of Mass Destruction has destroyed our economy, and many lives of those 47%.


 o
RE: What, no outrage?

Where is the outrage?

Well, the White House has coughed up a photo of Hussein skeet shooting last August. So now they've got outraged "skeeters."

-Ron-


 o
RE: What, no outrage?

I'm outraged that he does this all the time.

I mean, not the shooting. The fact that he pulls the idiots into bleating about something or other, giving them enough rope, and then making them look dumb.

I'm outraged that they keep falling for it and looking silly.


 o
RE: What, no outrage?

Husband is thrilled how the stock market is performing. Housing is up and Obama's approval is 60%. Hillary's is in the 70's, and she's taking a rest to prepare for the 2016 campaign. She'll write a book, maybe teach , help Bill with his charities..Won't it be great? And we'll get Bill back as first dude. His popularity is thru the roof. Gotta LOVE it.


 o
RE: What, no outrage?

  • Posted by vgkg 7-Va Tidewater (My Page) on
    Sun, Feb 3, 13 at 10:00

Maybe we should bookmark this thread just in case the numbers for the last quarter are adjusted upward as is sometimes the case once the dust settles and full stats are recrunched.

When the DOW hit 14,000 on Friday I was reminded about what Romney claimed last fall would occur once he was elected, that people would be so upbeat that the economy would automatically rebound. I called it "Tickle Down" at the time. If Romney had been elected he'd surely take credit for today's higher DOW and the housing market turning upward.


 o
RE: What, no outrage?

Well, Romney was soundly beaten and he isnt around to take the credit.
But, guess who is?
:)
Its too bad that some are actually wishing, wanting, and trying to argue the point that the economy of our country is on a downward spiral due to the Presidents failings, willing to tolerate the suffering and loss of jobs that would mean for their fellow Americans, all just so that they could say,

"See? I told you so."


 o
RE: What, no outrage?

Who is "tolerating the suffering and loss of jobs?"

I don't want it.

Apparently Obama does because we still have suffering and loss of jobs--recent statistics aren't too good.

I have no control over Obama, he is doing exactly what he has wanted to all along, except this term the veil is lifted.


 o
RE: What, no outrage?

The job situation won't improve until we quit making it far more profitable to gamble on derivatives and financial paper than investing in the actual, physical, economy.


 o
RE: What, no outrage?

The job situation won't improve until we quit making it far more profitable to gamble on derivatives and financial paper than investing in the actual, physical, economy.

And a political price is paid for obstructing action to fix the economy.


 o
RE: What, no outrage?

Demi - Slowly but surely he continues to clean up the disgraceful mess left by the last conservative President. Perhaps conservative voters will now think twice before rah- rah-ing their way across the internet when not one, but TWO wars are started by their President and sending the sugary sweet "I support the troops!" email robins by the millions, with the American flag as wallpaper in the email background, while those two proud and PATRIOTIC wars were killing untold thousands, maiming untold thousands, ruining the lives of untold numbers and their families, and the children of the veterns and the children of that war and running the WAR DEBT up, that debt we still have to pay back now, remember? - all the while ignoring that economic derailment was coming down the tracks for YEARS, the very one that hit just as Bushjr/crazyCheney was exiting the building - not even having any time to clean up behind themselves.

"I support our troops! "( Arent I a wonderful patriotic, REAL american every time I pass it on to ten email friends!)

And perhaps instead of reacting with absolute hysteria when they arent given a second chance to make it even worse than they left it, with a screwy dingbat sidekick to McCain, (wink!) maybe, instead they will change the direction, the mission and the message of the party to reflect the new situation they find themselves and go on to win the next election in 2012--- rather than scurrying about looking for that false birth certificate for that black skinned President which they just KNOW must exist somewhere, all the while declaring that YES! They would GLADLY vote a third time for Bush over that black skinned scary Obamaman!

But no. They dont change the "Loser here! Im a big loser!" message at all.

Instead they double down on the same divisiveness, have the term "Party on NO!" tatted across all conservatives and their reps foreheads as a sly way to win the respect and confidence of the American voter, all the while whining loudly, multiple times per day, about how that black skinned, arrogant President hasnt cleaned up properly behind them, shoved all kinds of objectionable, horrible things down their throats..... and tell each other how the American people will rectify THAT situation tout suite, with a landslide win by their favorite rich white guy ....oh who CARES what his name is? Any rich white guy will do!

(Except Huntsman. Boooring! )

So.

How did that plan work out for you? So gosh darn well that you are sticking to it fir 2016, it seems. Remember, gallup poll is your friend!

You seem to have a thing with veils. Are you making them your signature trademark?

What I dont get is that the same old resentful and inaccurate stuff keeps getting whined about by conservatives, while Obama's actual failings are ignored.

I can only guess it must be part of the same brilliant, devious, top secret plan to win in 2016.


 o
RE: What, no outrage?

"If you want to understand why the stock markets are doing well, why car and home sales continue to grow, why the U.S. economy continues to perform better than most people think, and why President Obama won the 2012 election, you've got to wade deep into the woods of the January jobs report, which was released Friday morning.

-snip-

To a large degree, the report saw the continuation of recent trends. The labor force participation rate and the employment-to-population ratio remained stuck at historically low levels - in part because the workforce is aging, and in part because there aren't a lot of jobs to suck people into the workforce. Construction added 28,000 jobs, because, as regular visitors to this space should know by now, housing is back! The retail, leisure and hospitality, and business and professional services sectors each added about 25,000 jobs. The government sector, as has been the case for virtually every month over the past three years, shed 9,000 jobs. Since May 2010, the public sector has shed 1.127 million jobs. (Some people call it socialism!)

But the good news was buried in the report. While the media and political types often hyperventilate about the reports, these monthly bulletins are really best thought of as first drafts. The data, which are really estimated based on relatively small samples, are revised about as frequently as an ambitious high-school senior's college essays. BLS is engaged in a near-constant process of retrospection. The jobs figures are revised in each of the two months after they are initially reported. And then, each year, BLS goes back and revises all the data for the prior 12 months. Why? Rather than simply estimate employment based on samples, BLS looks back at unemployment-insurance tax records to determine how many people were actually on the nation's payrolls. It also adjusts the data to account for its estimates of how many new companies were formed (births) and how many existing companies went out of business (deaths). (Matt Phillips has a good breakdown of these revisions over at Quartz.

Through this imperfect process, BLS believes it is providing a more accurate rear-window view of the economy. In the report released today, BLS published its revisions for 2012. And it turns out a lot more people were working throughout the year than previously thought. So, for example, in January 2012, BLS now says there were 132.809 million payroll jobs; that's 348,000 higher than the previously published numbers. So the year started off from a higher base than we thought. And as 2012 rolled on, in 10 of the 12 months, BLS says the economy produced significantly more jobs than it had previously found: 2.17 million new positions added, instead of 1.875 million, for an increase of about 335,000. Add in the higher benchmark (the January figure) and the higher job creation numbers, and BLS's final answer for 2013 is that there were 681,000 more people at work in December 2012 than we thought were working just one month ago.

Now, that's still not enough to claw back all the positions lost during the Great Recession of 2008-2009. The payroll jobs figures are the highest they've been since November 2008, but are still 3.226 million below the peak of January 2008. Put another way, the economy has regained all the jobs it lost during the first two years of the Obama administration and is now starting to regain the jobs lost in the last year of the Bush administration.

But the higher jobs figures help explain a lot. They help explain why consumer spending and retail sales held up quite well during 2012, in spite of the seemingly weak jobs numbers. They help explain why consumers on the whole did a far better job keeping up with financial obligations - from mortgages to credit cards. They help explain why more people were willing to take a plunge on purchasing home or buying a new car.

They also help explain one of the enduring political mysteries of the just-completed campaign. If the economy was so bad, if the job market was so poor, how come President Obama had such a comparatively easy time getting reelected?

-snip-

According to BLS, the economy created 2.2 million jobs in 2012, which is pretty good. Employment is generally the most significant economic indicator for politicians. And it turns out the more we learn about the labor market in 2012, the better it gets. snip - end quote

But hey, lets get back to insisting that we slash the gub'mint, then lose those jobs, and then Blame Obama !!!!!

Here is a link that might be useful: link


 o
RE: What, no outrage?

But hey, lets get back to insisting that we slash the gub'mint, then lose those jobs, and then Blame Obama !!!!!

David,
You Betcha! They know the hillbillies could not read all those words you posted. That is how they are going to win the White House back in 2016. It worked so good in 2012. I love it. It is going to make it so easy for Hillary.
So we need to play along and help our movement to 2016.

I am Outraged. Yes, yes, yes!!!


 o
RE: What, no outrage?

Can I go ahead and call the 2016 election as a Democrat win now?


 o
RE: What, no outrage?

vgkg..I said the same thing, If the DOW had hit 1400 and Romney was elected there would be jubilation...see he turned the economy around. But when Obama is in office, we switch to skeet gate. Pathetic LOSERS!!!


 o
RE: What, no outrage?

Can I go ahead and call the 2016 election as a Democrat win now?

Nothing in politics is certain, but the GoOPers appear to have learned nothing.

As long as they keep alienating women and all non-whites and non-olds, they will continue to slide into irrelevancy. You can tell where their base (and I do mean "base") thrives, some states will continue to slide backwards. But the immigration into Texas may mean that - barring almost unconsitutional gerrymandering - within a generation Tejas may lean blue too.


 o
RE: What, no outrage?

Esh, outrage is the "other" fuel that keeps some folks going, dontcha know...


 o
RE: What, no outrage?

And the Dow's over 14,000.

Yes, tell that to the whining racial minorities in Cleveland, Chicago, Detroit, etc.

Where are the jobs? They ask.


 o
RE: What, no outrage?

Where are the jobs? They ask.

China. And they know it.


 o
RE: What, no outrage?

Esh, to answer your question with candor, I hope we never get so sure of ourselves that in general, that the democratic voter cant imagine NOT being the winning favored party ( or person) of any election.

If we do, its time to check ourselves to be darn sure we haven't fallen into the same rabbit hole as did conservatives and their pandering reps.

I dont see it happening as quickly if we win 2016 *unless* we gain the majority in the house and the democrats finally use their power to use the votes to get some really big and important things done instead of being so timid that they get behind the President to be enthusiastic about passing a decent and comprehensive health care single payer bill as they should have in the first place, too afraid it would cost them their jobs. I see that much one sided power as an easy way to become blind to the failings and weaknesses of the party.

As I said at the time, in this forum, as for what resulted as health reform - it was better than no reform at all but an abortion of what it is it should have been, what this this country has desperately needed since Nixons time for petes sake, and what i fear will probably be delayed in full measure for another 20 + years.

What a crying shame for something that has been so needed and rejected out of fear and political play for power play for votes by gop reps to whip up hysteria in a segment of conservative voters- but which WILL take place, with the backing of the vast majority of Americans if not in truth, pretty much all- in the future.

I also worry that the democrats will become lazy, forget to do the hard and difficult job of constantly checkinf ( with honesty) to see if our path is still valid to the circumstances,.adapting and changing as our country's need absolutely will. I suspect that is VERY easy trap to fall into: blinders on.
Worse of all, imo, a slide further to the left, rather than maintaining the more moderate left of center that the party has rightly found to be a winning and workable position to be in.

I know that the true democrats, for which Im really not so much, will probably disagree that remaining in this moderate position is best.
However, please look at what happened to the GOP as it slid off the moderate right position of our fathers and grandfathers day, and, instead, into the party insidiously slipping further far, far away from any center with a right leaning it once had. Which made it a grand party of and for the people, when its basic function was needed.
It became a party with terrible reps representing that part of the voting block who is not good to have a lot of voice - one with pitifully little honest compassion without insulting and endless egotistical strings attached, the same with charity, pathetic pandering of those with little real reasoning - resulting in a party with any "grand" left to it.

I fear that what has become of the GOP and those who vote that way can very easily happen to democrats in its own way, equally as destructive in its own way.
Which would reduce the party to be the losing party additionally filled with a bunch of losers, the worst position to allow ourselves to fall into.

Which, before anyone strangles me, is all only my opinion and private fears.

We have to hold on until the republican finds it's "Grand" again. It might not for a long time if today is any indication of movement - and if the majority does become overly disappointed in the democrat party and forgets what came before it, we will once again be stuck with the GOP as it is rather than what it needs to be.

We cant afford the results of such a result ever again. We nearly didnt survive the last time.


 o
RE: What, no outrage?

If you don't expect a contraction with potential cuts to military spending your living on another planet.
Europe has already learned that austerity equals contraction why do I got to keep posting this here. None of the bright stars responded to all the economic posts I've posted none of you paid any attention to DAVOS or what the IMF instructed last year how there would be small growth if not contraction.
Being astounded at this is just another form of heads buried in the sand.

It's not brain surgery!

I know the Bright lites don't want to believe Paul Krugman or the IMF.


 o
RE: What, no outrage?

potential cuts to military spending

Crying for cuts to military spending is coupled with crying for spending those monies domestically - education, infrastructure, etc.


 o
RE: What, no outrage?

All I ever read is a hook without substance in some of these topics.
No depth no position as usual just goading! TEDIOUS!
Come on guys play for me that's all it does!


 o
RE: What, no outrage?

TIC TIC TIC


 o
RE: What, no outrage?

Labrea, at the link is a scathing takedown of the Beltway Deficit Feedback Loop, where Krugman -once again- points out that economic recovery will only come about through job creation, not curtailing spending.

I find it somewhat staggering that given the recent history of what just occurred in Europe and the UK, add on fairly clear logic on the Krugman side vs ideology, soundbites, and wishful thinking on the other, that the push is still to deliberately reduce the input of a major player in the economy hoping that it will help the same economy. "Long term" of course.

Here is a link that might be useful: link


 o
RE: What, no outrage?

that the push is still to deliberately reduce the input of a major player in the economy hoping that it will help the same economy. "Long term" of course.

The plutocrats don't care about the deficit. If you look at economic events through the lens of 'does this benefit plutocrats' or 'does this shiny object distract away from what the plutocrats are doing? squirrel! ' then the news makes much more sense.


 o
RE: What, no outrage?

A year a go I was posting this stuff any of the cricketeers open their mouth NAHHHH!

"July 7, 2011, 11:09 am 94 Comments
Contraction, Still Contractionary
A new paper from the IMF (pdf) puts another nail in the coffin of the doctrine of expansionary austerity. It basically shows that results purporting to show economic expansion following spending cuts and/or tax increases were based on a statistical illusion: an expanding economy can often lead to rising revenue and/or falling spending (e.g. because safety-net spending falls or because the government cuts back in an attempt to cool off inflationary pressures). And as a result, what the Alesina-Ardagna results capture is muddle by reverse causation.

The paper corrects this by using the historical record to identify true examples of deliberate austerity and it turns out that they are contractionary. The multiplier is less than one, but that may reflect the fact that these austerity programs did not take place in the face of a zero lower bound, so they were partly offset by monetary expansion.

The paper also provides a tentative answer to the apparent tendency of spending cuts to be less contractionary than tax increases: it looks as if central banks take more aggressive action to offset spending cuts than tax hikes, reflecting some combination of inflation concerns, belief that spending cuts are more durable, and (the paper doesn't say this) bankerly ideology.

If we were discussing a politically neutral subject, the evidence here would long since have been considered definitive: expansionary austerity is a doctrine that failed. But since we're in the political realm, of course, such a convenient doctrine can't be abandoned. On the contrary, it now seems to be the official doctrine of both the GOP and the White House."


 o
RE: What, no outrage?

Well, judging from the reports coming out of Greece and Spain where they've successfully protected the banks from losing much money on their stupid loans while gutting the economy in the name of "austerity", I hope we can continue to shed a light on what the CUT!! CUT!!! people will achieve here.


 o
RE: What, no outrage?

If the GOP drops the idea that Obama is ruining the country because of a refusal to adopt an austerity program, what do they have left?

That is the reason for the crickets, Joe and David.


 o
RE: What, no outrage?

Just a continuation of the same by the same since I've been on here.


 o Post a Follow-Up

Please Note: Only registered members are able to post messages to this forum.

    If you are a member, please log in.

    If you aren't yet a member, join now!


Return to the Hot Topics Forum

Information about Posting

  • You must be logged in to post a message. Once you are logged in, a posting window will appear at the bottom of the messages. If you are not a member, please register for an account.
  • Please review our Rules of Play before posting.
  • Posting is a two-step process. Once you have composed your message, you will be taken to the preview page. You will then have a chance to review your post, make changes and upload photos.
  • After posting your message, you may need to refresh the forum page in order to see it.
  • Before posting copyrighted material, please read about Copyright and Fair Use.
  • We have a strict no-advertising policy!
  • If you would like to practice posting or uploading photos, please visit our Test forum.
  • If you need assistance, please Contact Us and we will be happy to help.


Learn more about in-text links on this page here