• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

US jobless rate falls to 7.8 pct., 44-month low

Milhouse said:
we all know that you think that obama hasn't accomplished a damn thing due to the loser obstructionist republican congress. you have posted that opinion roughly 629,418 times. if that's what you believe, that obama isn't to blame for anything, then that means that nothing positive can be attributed to him either. right? i mean, that's a consistent way of looking at it.

therefore, the loser obstructionist republican congress gets all the credit for the awesome jobless rate and DJIA number. right?
Click to expand...

Something happened? I blame Bush. Unless it was good, of course.
 
DreamOnDemOn said:
Like before women were forced to work, whether they wanted to or not, by high taxes and high inflation.
Click to expand...

Come on man. Women weren't forced to work because of taxes and inflation...they perhaps had a desire to...I know, I know, barefoot and in the kitchen...
 
Last edited:
Btw, 7.8% still sucks. Not sure why the Feds would cook these numbers.
 
How much does 8% becoming the new 5% have to do with the increases in the minimum wage? The number of people earning the minimum wage is lower now than it has been for a long time...would a lower minimum wage mean obviously more people working for less, but also more people...working?
 
ONW said:
Come on man. Women weren't forced to work because of taxes and inflation...they perhaps had a desire to...I know, I know, barefoot and in the kitchen...
Click to expand...

Rich women fought for and won the right for poor and lower middle class women to be single mothers with four kids on food stamps working for minimum wage barefoot at the carwash. What a great society 39% of the GDP going to the government has bought us. Of course it all comes out of the hide of rich creeps, so keep on crafting tax hikes. Prosperity is just around the corner.
 
We are still less then 4 years out from a pretty major economic crisis. These things take a while to get fully digested by the system.
 
ChrisL68 said:
We are still less then 4 years out from a pretty major economic crisis. These things take a while to get fully digested by the system.
Click to expand...

Sure, but if Mitt were to press a point that the Geithner Treasury sold out homeowners and used HAMP to slow, and not reduce, foreclosures, he'd be right. And that mega-fail hasn't helped housing as much as effective modifications would have, though it's probably preferable to getting those foreclosures quicker. HAMP's implementation first constrained borrowers by messing with them through trial modifications that servicers had literally no incentives to turn into full modifications, then pussing out on principal reductions, which would incent borrowers to not walk away, and had a depressing effect on all other homeowners, who still have worse "family balance sheets" than they should. We could (and should) have had a better response to the crisis if not for the ideological capture of Obama's most important appointee. We need a better Secretary of the Treasury.
 
TuffaloDeac10 said:
Sure, but if Mitt were to press a point that the Geithner Treasury sold out homeowners and used HAMP to slow, and not reduce, foreclosures, he'd be right. And that mega-fail hasn't helped housing as much as effective modifications would have, though it's probably preferable to getting those foreclosures quicker. HAMP's implementation first constrained borrowers by messing with them through trial modifications that servicers had literally no incentives to turn into full modifications, then pussing out on principal reductions, which would incent borrowers to not walk away, and had a depressing effect on all other homeowners, who still have worse "family balance sheets" than they should. We could (and should) have had a better response to the crisis if not for the ideological capture of Obama's most important appointee. We need a better Secretary of the Treasury.
Click to expand...

Someone who can spread the printed up monopoly money around better.
 
TuffaloDeac10 said:
Sure, but if Mitt were to press a point that the Geithner Treasury sold out homeowners and used HAMP to slow, and not reduce, foreclosures, he'd be right. And that mega-fail hasn't helped housing as much as effective modifications would have, though it's probably preferable to getting those foreclosures quicker. HAMP's implementation first constrained borrowers by messing with them through trial modifications that servicers had literally no incentives to turn into full modifications, then pussing out on principal reductions, which would incent borrowers to not walk away, and had a depressing effect on all other homeowners, who still have worse "family balance sheets" than they should. We could (and should) have had a better response to the crisis if not for the ideological capture of Obama's most important appointee. We need a better Secretary of the Treasury.
Click to expand...

Not defending Geithner or HAMP here in the slightest. But Geithner was working for the prior Pub administration before he was working for this administration. And while HAMP has been abysmal, it was the Pubs in the Senate who unanimously voted against the 1 bill that really could have helped homeowners with a much fairer process, and which wouldn't have hurt the banks as badly as they believed because it would have stabilized the housing market a bit by keeping more folks in their homes and fixed the banks' losses at numbers that usually aren't as bad as the numbers post-foreclosure - the bankruptcy cramdown bill. Passed the house and Obama supported it but lost in the Senate something like 51-47. Thereafter came HAMP as a backup plan. Had McCain won, we likely would have ended up with the same HAMP program, because that's what the banks wanted.
 
ONW said:
8% is the new 5% BSD. Sucks, yes. Reality, yes.
Click to expand...

Uh...false. America is not Atlanta. Keep your decline to yourself.

Would it be fair to say that the Obama administration is...ahem,....Obviously Not Working?
 
cville deac said:
Not defending Geithner or HAMP here in the slightest. But Geithner was working for the prior Pub administration before he was working for this administration. And while HAMP has been abysmal, it was the Pubs in the Senate who unanimously voted against the 1 bill that really could have helped homeowners with a much fairer process, and which wouldn't have hurt the banks as badly as they believed because it would have stabilized the housing market a bit by keeping more folks in their homes and fixed the banks' losses at numbers that usually aren't as bad as the numbers post-foreclosure - the bankruptcy cramdown bill. Passed the house and Obama supported it but lost in the Senate something like 51-47. Thereafter came HAMP as a backup plan. Had McCain won, we likely would have ended up with the same HAMP program, because that's what the banks wanted.
Click to expand...

It's a good thing we have Treasury keeping a close eye on those profit-driven banks. If it were left to the free market we might as well all move to Somalia.
 
jhmd2000 said:
Uh...false. America is not Atlanta. Keep your decline to yourself.

Would it be fair to say that the Obama administration is...ahem,....Obviously Not Working?
Click to expand...

It's just reality. I'm not claiming it's a decline in expectations but a paradigm shift because the old one no longer applies. Until new fields of opportunity emerge, a computer can do some of the jobs that a human could 20 years ago, doesn't bitch, doesn't show up late, doesn't need healthcare or a 401K.
 
ONW said:
It's just reality. I'm not claiming it's a decline in expectations but a paradigm shift because the old one no longer applies. Until new fields of opportunity emerge, a computer can do some of the jobs that a human could 20 years ago, doesn't bitch, doesn't show up late, doesn't need healthcare or a 401K.
Click to expand...

And, when the special people in the government tell it to do so, it creates money from absolutely nothing and spreads it around to the friends of the government people.
 
Are we still talking about unemployment?
 
Jack Welch uncorks (and lands a haymaker on Austa(i)n Goolsbee):

"... I'm not sorry for the heated debate that ensued. I'm not the first person to question government numbers, and hopefully I won't be the last. Take, for example, one of my chief critics in this go-round, Austan Goolsbee, former chairman of the Obama administration's Council of Economic Advisers. Back in 2003, Mr. Goolsbee himself, commenting on a Bush-era unemployment figure, wrote in a New York Times op-ed: "the government has cooked the books."

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB100...?mod=WSJ_article_comments#articleTabs=article
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top