DOW over 9k and rising, unemployment starting to drop, Freddie stabilizing...

[Enkidu]

the 247k was much lower than expected, and I think that in order for the jobless rate to go down while still losing 247k, it would mean that there's more hiring than that going on in the month.

There's not more hiring, the workforce simply shrank. The only silver lining is that we beat the estimates, this is still a bad month in a bad economy. If this trend continues the unemployment rate may stay around 9.4-9.5% for awhile, but eventually those that have left the workforce are going to re-enter (when the economy is looking better), that's when unemployment will hit the 10% or higher peaks.

[Beckwin]

even assuming that's true, the losses were below expected and significantly lower than june. no one is saying we're out of it yet; just that we may be starting to see signs of a coming turnaround.

[Enkidu]

Should have posted the source: Employment Situation Summary

Workforce shrank by 422k. Total employed -155k, total unemployed -267k (people who were previously unemployed no longer looking for work most likely), and a sharp rise of +637k people no longer considered in the workforce (i.e. people of working age not seeking employment). It's all based on polls, so really only the trends matter. For the last three months the trends are saying that people are simply giving up looking for work (people not in the labor force is a rising trend), which helps stabilize or lower the unemployment rate as being unemployed is defined as actively seeking employment.

So yes, in the end the -0.1% is certainly superficial. However it's still good that we're under the estimates. I still think things are going to get much worse before they get better - all the job loss is certainly going to take it's toll when pay-option loans and more ARM shit starts hitting in 2010. More bailouts, more doom-and-gloom in the press, and all that jazz for 2010, in my opinion, will see the economy fall flat on it's face again. Hope not though.

[Beckwin]

Fair analysis.

What do you make of the perhaps more significant signs in the corporate world? We're getting reports of bigger financial institutions/major companies starting to stabilize (Freddie getting it's bearings back, GM exiting bankruptcy, and GS profiting) along with some sort of optimism from investors (rising stock markets, people pulling out of Treasury bonds to invest in markets [noted in one of the yahoo links I posted]. Shouldn't that start resulting in job creation fairly soon rather than much later? If anything I ideologically should have less faith in that happening than you would, so I'm curious for your take on it.

frankly I think things will only start to significantly shape up when more stimulus jobs start getting filled and people are spending more money, but I still think these signs are good ones, even if possibly very early.

[Odesseiron]

Fair analysis.

What do you make of the perhaps more significant signs in the corporate world? We're getting reports of bigger financial institutions/major companies starting to stabilize (Freddie getting it's bearings back, GM exiting bankruptcy, and GS profiting) along with some sort of optimism from investors (rising stock markets, people pulling out of Treasury bonds to invest in markets [noted in one of the yahoo links I posted]. Shouldn't that start resulting in job creation fairly soon rather than much later? If anything I ideologically should have less faith in that happening than you would, so I'm curious for your take on it.

frankly I think things will only start to significantly shape up when more stimulus jobs start getting filled and people are spending more money, but I still think these signs are good ones, even if possibly very early.

You're still buying into that "stimulus is going to create new jobs" nonsense? Oh right, I forgot! The infrastructure jobs are coming. You realize out of the whole of the stimulus, MAYBE 6% is for that kind of stuff? I have yet to see 1 job created out of it, let alone the 600,000 he Obama promised are coming in June by the end of the summer. It's almost the middle of August, and I don't see anything.

I'm not ruling this out, but so far it's been nothing but empty promises. I'm going to have to agree 110% with Wulfgang stating while I'm not an "opponent" of the President, these forums are so liberal it's almost sickening to a degree. As soon as a conservative or something with a view different than yours comes out, everyone gangs up on them to try and get them out of "their" discussion. I could go on a tangent stating how that's a liberal thing to do, slinging as much mud at the opposing viewpoint so they can get back to bashing whatever, but the conservatives are as guilty as liberals, though in these forums...good luck with that.

[Dareus]

You're still buying into that "stimulus is going to create new jobs" nonsense? Oh right, I forgot! The infrastructure jobs are coming. You realize out of the whole of the stimulus, MAYBE 6% is for that kind of stuff? I have yet to see 1 job created out of it, let alone the 600,000 he Obama promised are coming in June by the end of the summer. It's almost the middle of August, and I don't see anything.

Not sure about where you live, but here in NJ they have been doing an almost complete overhaul of the road systems and bridges. A few of the bridges even had Stimulus package at work signs on them. So it might not be the 600,000 jobs he promised, but I know for a fact that many jobs are being created, at least where I live.

[Jaybar]

I can attest to what Dareus said. They are doing pretty much the same thing here in the northern suburbs of Chicago, and I'm not sure what else to the west or in the actual city. Every work site had those "Stimulus" signs as well.

[Enkidu]

Fair analysis.

What do you make of the perhaps more significant signs in the corporate world? We're getting reports of bigger financial institutions/major companies starting to stabilize (Freddie getting it's bearings back, GM exiting bankruptcy, and GS profiting) along with some sort of optimism from investors (rising stock markets, people pulling out of Treasury bonds to invest in markets [noted in one of the yahoo links I posted]. Shouldn't that start resulting in job creation fairly soon rather than much later? If anything I ideologically should have less faith in that happening than you would, so I'm curious for your take on it.

frankly I think things will only start to significantly shape up when more stimulus jobs start getting filled and people are spending more money, but I still think these signs are good ones, even if possibly very early.

I think it's hard to say right now. It's easy to be optimistic when things seem to be lining up, I just don't think they really are. The unemployment dip is superficial, Fmac will almost assuredly need more federal money, and does anyone really believe GM is in the clear?

And I don't think corporations are really optimistic at this point, at least not in terms of hiring people. They're optimistic that they'll have to layoff fewer people, which is really a sad form of optimism! When 10% or higher rears it's ugly head we'll see how American's cope. People who haven't refinanced out of ARMS will lose their homes in 2010, people who have refinanced but since lost their job will lose their homes, and morale will likely be at an all-time low.

Anyways that's just what I think, I'm not an economist and I don't know what the administrations plans to do to fix any of that. I do know, however, that's it's a little short-sighted for the administration to say "HEY LOOK unemployment is down 0.1% everything's better guyz!". Honestly I just like being pessimistic, things can only look up from my predictions! (hopefully)

[Plow]

Fair analysis.

What do you make of the perhaps more significant signs in the corporate world? We're getting reports of bigger financial institutions/major companies starting to stabilize (Freddie getting it's bearings back, GM exiting bankruptcy, and GS profiting) along with some sort of optimism from investors (rising stock markets, people pulling out of Treasury bonds to invest in markets [noted in one of the yahoo links I posted]. Shouldn't that start resulting in job creation fairly soon rather than much later? If anything I ideologically should have less faith in that happening than you would, so I'm curious for your take on it.

No, that's the kind of progress that happens slowly, and isn't as apparent beyond "gee we sure are pretty well off these days." It's depressing, kind of, because it's exactly that transparency that allowed the culture to believe we can just do whatever and we'll be fine, and therefore that we should focus much less on the economy.

If Gore had run on the "It's the economy, stupid" path, I personally think he would have won. Unfortunately, even the democrats lost track of the fact that when everyone's doing better, well, everything works better. The lack of driving home how important the economy was to having good healthy family life allowed the "family values" to try to change the focus to "the money will be fine, now it's time to instill our values!"

Which, sadly, worked really, really well.

frankly I think things will only start to significantly shape up when more stimulus jobs start getting filled and people are spending more money, but I still think these signs are good ones, even if possibly very early.

The way I look at it is, verifiable effects at this point are a sign of significant short term progress to come. Like I said that you agreed with earlier, these actions are for the near future. We are basically taking out an emergency mortgage. The car's broken down, the kids are hungry, the heat's not working and it's fucking cold in here. Yes, we're looking for a 2nd job, and we're aware that we're going to have to take it and hold it for quite a while to really get back on our feet.

But right now, we gotta get to work, we gotta get the kids fed and get them to school, and we gotta get some wood in the fireplace. Accomplishing that much alone is a huge, huge step.

[ertyu]

Obama puts an almost 1 trillion dollar stimulus through the house and what did it even do? He gives it to big companies that do what with it? AIG giving out millions of dollars of bonuses, and who knows what other companies are doing with it. It's effect on the economy is dubious. more than 70% of GDP comes from consumer spending and I don't know about you guys, but I didn't see even a penny of extra money that I could spend more anywhere.

At least with Bush's stimulus, consumer spending rose by near 4%. This stimulus was a joke, all it did was raise this U.S. National Debt Clock so I'm not too thrilled about any of this.

Edit: And i'm not saying that Bush's stimulus plan was any good, it was also shit. But at least some of it was used for the purpose that it should be used for.

[Plow]

Obama puts an almost 1 trillion dollar stimulus through the house and what did it even do? He gives it to big companies that do what with it? AIG giving out millions of dollars of bonuses, and who knows what other companies are doing with it. It's effect on the economy is dubious. more than 70% of GDP comes from consumer spending and I don't know about you guys, but I didn't see even a penny of extra money that I could spend more anywhere.

At least with Bush's stimulus, consumer spending rose by near 4%. This stimulus was a joke, all it did was raise this U.S. National Debt Clock so I'm not too thrilled about any of this.

Edit: And i'm not saying that Bush's stimulus plan was any good, it was also shit. But at least some of it was used for the purpose that it should be used for.

It's not about raising it at the moment, it's about getting it out of free fall.

[ertyu]

It's not about raising it at the moment, it's about getting it out of free fall.

Ok, let's just use that term then. (I assume you were talking about consumer spending? Or were you talking about the national debt?)

[Plow]

Consumer spending and the resulting job loss, yes.

[ertyu]

We can only hope the public option for healthcare doesn't pass. If that passes that would be one very non-reversible thing that America would have to live with forever. 3 trillion dollars over the next 20 years, woo! MORE deficit spending! Let's fucking dig this hole a little deeper!

[Plow]

It's all good. Seriously.


Once people see that the people in charge at the moment know what they're doing, and are basing their actions off the policies that created the largest surpluses we've ever had, we'll actually be able to get enough people fully supporting them to make real progress on eliminating the debt. Just like we did 10 years ago.

[Senoska]

Haven't some of the banks already paid off their TARP funds? That being said, who cares if they give bonuses, at this point, it's their money. For someone who seems so concerned with the government telling you what to spend your money on you sure don't apply that standard to large businesses. I think that's the sign of a double standard, don't you think?

Also, here's to hoping that public option passes. I honestly could not support Obama more right now. I think he's doing everything he promised plus some.

[Plow]

Yeah, he's doing better than I thought he would. Glad he kept Hildog involved.

[ertyu]

Haven't some of the banks already paid off their TARP funds? That being said, who cares if they give bonuses, at this point, it's their money. For someone who seems so concerned with the government telling you what to spend your money on you sure don't apply that standard to large businesses. I think that's the sign of a double standard, don't you think?

Also, here's to hoping that public option passes. I honestly could not support Obama more right now. I think he's doing everything he promised plus some.

Who cares? I care. If the national debt is being raised with bailout money, and companies are using that to give their execs 50 million dollar bonuses, I think I can be pretty fucking upset. To answer your other statement, no. AIG did not pay off its TARP money when it gave the bonuses, and it still has yet to. In fact, only a very few amount of companies have repaid, you can see the list

here: Companies Repaying TARP Funds - WSJ.com

[Plow]

Who cares? I care. If the national debt is being raised with bailout money, and companies are using that to give their execs 50 million dollar bonuses, I think I can be pretty fucking upset.

But it's ok to raise the national debt with tax breaks for only the richest people and biggest corporations, while they get the richest they've ever been and the poor get worse and worse?

To answer your other statement, no. AIG did not pay off its TARP money when it gave the bonuses, and it still has yet to. In fact, only a very few amount of companies have repaid, you can see the list

here: Companies Repaying TARP Funds - WSJ.com

And yeah it's more exceptional that anyone has than to not have, at this point.

[Rhinox]

But plow, how else are we gonna get out of this mess! we need to listen to the principles of reaganomics and continue the neofeudalism. We must be nice to our rich lords so they can take pity and provide for us.