After All The Billions, Economy is Flat

[Papasito]

Unemployment rate remains unchanged at 9.7 percent in February
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/35723202/ns/business-stocks_and_economy

And no improvement is spun as "positive"...

U.S. employers cut a smaller than expected 36,000 jobs in February, leaving the unemployment rate steady at 9.7 percent

Please. If this was McCain at the helm, the media would be having thier torches lit and the angry mob would be raging!

Most of the people I talk to are hoping that the recovery is a reality, but with Cap & Trade and Health Care on the horizon, they think the worst times are yet to come....


And I don't want to hear the "It takes time" crapola. The Stimulus was passed 13 months ago.

The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009, abbreviated ARRA [[Pub.L. 111-5) and commonly referred to as the Stimulus, is an economic stimulus package enacted by the 111th United States Congress in February 2009
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/America...nt_Act_of_2009

Things should be on the resurgence, not flatlining and/or going backwards.

[ghettopalmetto]

And no improvement is spun as "positive"...

Please. If this was McCain at the helm, the media would be having thier torches lit and the angry mob would be raging!

Most of the people I talk to are hoping that the recovery is a reality, but with Cap & Trade and Health Care on the horizon, they think the worst times are yet to come....


And I don't want to hear the "It takes time" crapola. The Stimulus was passed 13 months ago.

Things should be on the resurgence, not flatlining and/or going backwards.

What a rigorous and highly academic approach! Isolate one number [[unemployment rate), see it not change for one month, and conclude "the economy" is flat and that ARRA did not work one iota.

How novel.

Do you get dizzy from all the spinning you do?

[TKshreve]

What a rigorous and highly academic approach! Isolate one number [[unemployment rate), see it not change for one month, and conclude "the economy" is flat and that ARRA did not work one iota.

How novel.

Do you get dizzy from all the spinning you do?

How about another number? Jobs............

[Mikeg]

President Barack Obama, Feb. 5, 2009:

“If we do not move swiftly to sign the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act into law, an economy that is already in crisis will be faced with catastrophe. Millions more Americans will lose their jobs. Homes will be lost. Families will go without health care. Our crippling dependence on foreign oil will continue. That is the price of inaction."

[source]

[oladub]

“If we do not act boldly and swiftly, a bad situation could become dramatically worse.� -Barack Obama cited a report from his economic advisers warning that without the stimulus, unemployment would hit around 8.5 percent.

Papasito, You aren't being patient enough. Yeah, yeah, I know that the head of Obama's Council of Economic Advisers and the chief economist and economic-policy adviser to Vice President Joe Biden both said that if Porkulus wasn't passed immediately, unemployment would soar to 8% and that Porkulus would create up to 4 million new jobs. However, Porkulus has already saved up to 2 million jobs. According to Lawrence Summers, Porkulus is on track and last July the President rejected call for more stimulus because the Porkulus had not yet been fully implemented. We shouldn't expect to see the full results of Porkulus until the end of this year or 2011.

These people who insist that we need another stimulus package and even say that the failure of Porkulus was that it wasn't big enough are guilty of having lost their hope and the belief in change and are now undermining the credibility of our President.

http://www.time.com/time/business/ar...#ixzz0hJbjyRSE

[rb336]

Flat, which it is not [[gdp annualized rate of + 5.7%), beats the crap out of the freefall it was in under dubya's last two years, and beats the daylights out of where we would be if the tea bag gang had their wish

[Papasito]

Arrogance is an occupational hazard in politics, one that is often fatal, and the Democrats show every sign of having succumbed. You would think someone in the party would sound the alarm. But, so far, Democrats seem willing to follow their leaders off the cliff. The president, House speaker and Senate majority leader appear ready to defy the American public and ram a disastrous and unpopular overturn of health care down our throats, regardless of the consequences to the country or their own political futures. There is something deeply disturbing about this turn of events — and undemocratic.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/uc/20100305/...chx/op_2013167

more on fixing the economy, less government takeovers please.
it doesn't take a "neocon" or a "teabagger" to figure out what's going on here.

I know that posting on some obscure website won't make things any better, so I can do my part by buying a home [[ I have a bid in on one now ) and by working as hard as I can every day so I can generate money for myself and my employer so that my employer may possibly be able to hire more employees. Times are rough, I know, because I was unemployed half of 2009 and I am very happy and fortunate to have finally found a good job.

I have very strong feelings toward the Economy being our #1 focus, because I was a victim of it. And with a simple layoff I could be a victim again at any given moment.

[Mikeg]

Flat, which it is not [[gdp annualized rate of + 5.7%),

That annualized GDP growth you are touting is just relative to the previous quarter. How does the 4Q09 real GDP growth compare to a year ago?

Here's how IBD at RealClearMarkets analyzes it:

Real GDP rose just 0.1% in the fourth quarter from last year, virtually flat. Worse, real nonresidential fixed investment - a proxy for business investment in future output - plunged 14.6% from last year. That's a shocking vote of "no confidence" in Obamanomics by America's entrepreneurs and businesses.

[Sstashmoo]

Can't fix an economy by failing to change the conditions that put it there in the first place, Trade, deregulations. They are throwing cash into a big black hole, our grandkids' cash.

Obama will be remembered as the modern day Hoover. Not entirely his fault, but he'll take the rap.

[EastSider]

Flat, which it is not [[gdp annualized rate of + 5.7%), beats the crap out of the freefall it was in under dubya's last two years, and beats the daylights out of where we would be if the tea bag gang had their wish

You assume the GDP as it is currently formulated accurately reflects the economy. The GDP numbers can be artificially pumped up by increasing government spending. Even then, though, that assumes each variable is really independent of the others.

[Diehard]

And no improvement is spun as "positive"...
Please. If this was McCain at the helm, the media would be having thier torches lit and the angry mob would be raging!

Yes, yes, blame "the media." Don't point any fingers at the Bush policies and Wall Street greed that damn near destroyed the economy in the first place.

Most of the people I talk to

How could anyone possibly dispute the expert opinions of "most of the people you talk to?"

are hoping that the recovery is a reality, but with Cap & Trade and Health Care on the horizon, they think the worst times are yet to come....

Sounds like "most of the people you talk to" are as fond of meaningless right-wing talking points as you are. Perhaps you should widen your social circle.

And I don't want to hear the "It takes time" crapola. The Stimulus was passed 13 months ago.

Things should be on the resurgence, not flatlining and/or going backwards.

It took several years for the shady real estate/out-of-control Wall Street/Bush tax cuts for millionaires ponzi scheme to tank the economy. What makes you, or anyone, think it can all be fixed in 13 months?

[ghettopalmetto]

You assume the GDP as it is currently formulated accurately reflects the economy. The GDP numbers can be artificially pumped up by increasing government spending. Even then, though, that assumes each variable is really independent of the others.

GDP can be "artificially" pumped by increasing business investment too.

Or increasing exports.

Or decreasing imports.

Or increasing consumer spending.

But in the aftermath of the collapse of the financial sector, none of those four things was happening.

GDP = C[[onsumer spending) + I[[nvestment) + G[[overnment spending) + [[EXports - IMports)

This is Gross Domestic Product, by definition. If you find it too crass and inaccurate for your tastes, please provide a justified alternative that you believe is "formulated to accurately reflect the economy".

[ghettopalmetto]

It took several years for the shady real estate/out-of-control Wall Street/Bush tax cuts for millionaires ponzi scheme to tank the economy. What makes you, or anyone, think it can all be fixed in 13 months?

I'm still waiting for the 2001 Bush tax cuts to stimulate the economy like we were promised!!!

[ejames01]

The economy is a whole lot better where I am at!!!

[Diehard]

The economy is a whole lot better where I am at!!!

You're in China?

[Diehard]

I'm still waiting for the 2001 Bush tax cuts to stimulate the economy like we were promised!!!

What are you talking about? It stimulated the luxury yacht industry, didn't it?

[Papasito]

Sounds like "most of the people you talk to" are as fond of meaningless right-wing talking points as you are. Perhaps you should widen your social circle.

These people are multi-millionaires with 11,OOO square foot homes who own or have owned large companies. They are Democrats and Republicans. They are being very conservative in thier business practices until they see the results of these two major moves by the government. Cap and Trade will change then entire way the nation does business. Health Care will change 1/6 of our economy.
If you dont think these two things are important to job growth, you need to rethink.

It took several years for the shady real estate/out-of-control Wall Street/Bush tax cuts for millionaires ponzi scheme to tank the economy. What makes you, or anyone, think it can all be fixed in 13 months?

I'm sorry, man, but Bush's policies did not solely tank the economy. If you know anything about the last 20 or so years, you would understand it was an accumulative combination of factors as well as deregulation of banks, ect. Bush I Clinton and Bush II all had thier hand in this. The tanking of the economy was a bi-partisan accomplishment. Take the blinders off.

[Diehard]

I'm sorry, man, but Bush and Bush's policies did not solely tank the economy. If you know anything about the last 20 or so years, you would understand it was an accumulative combination of factors as well as deregulation of banks, ect. Bush I Clinton and Bush II all had thier hand in this. The tanking of the economy was a bi-partisan accomplishment. Take the blinders off.

Blinders? Dude, you're actually agreeing with me. Yes, it took several years for the bubble economy to build up to the 2008 crash, and now you're screaming bloody murder that Obama couldn't fix the damage in 13 months. Of course, you're conveniently forgetting that Clinton left Bush with a budget surplus. But that's the media's fault, right?

[Papasito]

I only said that the media portrayed a flat economy as POSITIVE while under the leadership of Obama. I was trying to state that had these same figures come out with McCain in the White House, the tone of the media on the same numbers would have been harsh. McCain would never have been able to do enough to this economy to please the media. They would have been bucking him at every opportunity.

I really had no problem with Clinton. I would have to say I agreed with about 75% of what Clinton did. He was a pretty good president, overall. He did a great job letting the economy boom, other than letting the banks run wild and not addressing Health Care after HillaryCare tanked.

To be quite honest, if the economy BOOMED, and Obama proved everyone wrong, I might even consider pulling the lever for him, but I seriously doubt that with all the government burden and debt on the economy that this could happen.....as well as plans in the works to drastically increase the price of energy.....to power and heat our homes and put fuel in our gas tanks....how can an economy recover with all of this in the works?

[Diehard]

I only said that the media portrayed a flat economy as POSITIVE while under the leadership of Obama. I was trying to state that had these same figures come out with McCain in the White House, the tone of the media on the same numbers would have been harsh. McCain would never have been able to do enough to this economy to please the media. They would have been bucking him at every opportunity.

Sure, whatever you say. There's no way to prove it, but apparently you can read the mind of "the media." That's a really ridiculous point, though. Of all the factors and guilty parties in this recession, you choose to focus on "the media" and how mean they might possibly have been to a President McCain. Who gives a crap about "pleasing the media?" The people losing their jobs, homes and health insurance are angry at whoever's responsible for this mess, not "the media".

I really had no problem with Clinton. I would have to say I agreed with about 75% of what Clinton did. He was a pretty good president, overall. He did a great job letting the economy boom, other than letting the banks run wild and not addressing Health Care after HillaryCare tanked.

To be quite honest, if the economy BOOMED, and Obama proved everyone wrong, I might even consider pulling the lever for him,

That remains to be seen, doesn't it? He's only 1/4 of the way into his term.

but I seriously doubt that with all the government burden and debt on the economy that this could happen.....

Which is ALL his fault, after only 13 months.

[Retroit]

The economic cycles runs independently of the Presidential cycle. I try real hard not to blame or credit any President for the economic cycles. But what can not be ignored is that the government cannot continue spending money it doesn't have without disastrous consequences. I would be in favor of limited non-pork-barreled stimulus plans during economic downturns if I could be assured that during prosperous times our governments would be balancing their budgets.

[EastSider]

GDP can be "artificially" pumped by increasing business investment too.

Or increasing exports.

Or decreasing imports.

Or increasing consumer spending.

But in the aftermath of the collapse of the financial sector, none of those four things was happening.

GDP = C[[onsumer spending) + I[[nvestment) + G[[overnment spending) + [[EXports - IMports)

This is Gross Domestic Product, by definition. If you find it too crass and inaccurate for your tastes, please provide a justified alternative that you believe is "formulated to accurately reflect the economy".

You're exactly right that any of the variables are subject to artificial stimulation, and that's the over-arching point. GDP is an aggregate measure composed of individual aggregate measures. We know nothing about whether the final goods represent real wealth expansion or if they just show that we're eating our seed corn, to put it colloquially.

I also believe including government spending in the calculation is misleading, because of opportunity cost. The money used for government spending doesn't represent earnings from voluntary exchanges the same way a car purchase does. It comes from taxation, and each of the dollars collected could have been spent another way. Some could have been used for investment; some could have been saved, an act which makes lending possible.

[ghettopalmetto]

The money used for government spending doesn't represent earnings from voluntary exchanges the same way a car purchase does. It comes from taxation, and each of the dollars collected could have been spent another way. Some could have been used for investment; some could have been saved, an act which makes lending possible.

You're absolutely right. Value produced that is not government spending, i.e. private-sector dollars, would have to count under Consumer Spending, Investment, or Exports. In other words, you'd see a bump in one of those categories [[or a decrease in Imports) if Government Spending decreased [[and vice-versa). Through simple arithmetic in the definition of the term, GDP accounts for these "opportunity costs".

So if you want to decrease government spending as a percentage of GDP, get investing, spending, and exporting, people. And maybe not so much with the buying of Chinese-made goods from Walmart.

[Zacha341]

Well stated, I rarely comment in these discussions as I've observed over and over they are partisan loyalty oriented withstanding realities. If you give an opinion even supported with links, charts, more links, etc. too often your comments are summed up as "right wing" talking points... then the ad hominem attack[[s) begin relative to your intelligence blah, blah... Evidence that there is no real interest in sharing points from a bi-partisan or alternate view.

Simply put, if warnings come from the wrong side of the fence politically they are dismissed in the current adversarial political environment... the right is a guilty of this as the far left. In the meantime our debt continues to escalate and the borrow and spend cycle [[opps, that's a another "right wing" talking point) is not sustainable.

These people are multi-millionaires with 11,OOO square foot homes who own or have owned large companies. They are Democrats and Republicans. They are being very conservative in thier business practices until they see the results of these two major moves by the government. Cap and Trade will change then entire way the nation does business. Health Care will change 1/6 of our economy.
If you dont think these two things are important to job growth, you need to rethink.

I'm sorry, man, but Bush's policies did not solely tank the economy. If you know anything about the last 20 or so years, you would understand it was an accumulative combination of factors as well as deregulation of banks, ect. Bush I Clinton and Bush II all had thier hand in this. The tanking of the economy was a bi-partisan accomplishment. Take the blinders off.

[Zacha341]

Good point, and business growth is not responding as predicted...

Can't fix an economy by failing to change the conditions that put it there in the first place, Trade, deregulations. They are throwing cash into a big black hole, our grandkids' cash.

Obama will be remembered as the modern day Hoover. Not entirely his fault, but he'll take the rap.