Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: Ripsnort on April 07, 2007, 01:44:40 PM
-
Nice economic news that shows how well our economy is doing with a Republican in charge. :aok
The unemployment rate fell to a five-year low of 4.4 percent as job growth picked up to 180,000 last month — a show of strength that bolstered hopes that the economy will endure the turmoil in the housing and mortgage markets without major harm.
The March increase in jobs reported by the Labor Department reflected a revival of hiring among construction companies, department stores and retailers as well as continued robust growth of health care jobs. The construction job gains erased a big loss in February resulting from cold weather and left jobs in the sector roughly unchanged since September with increases in hiring for office and government construction projects offsetting losses in housing construction.
In another sign of unexpected strength, hiring in January and February was 32,000 more than previously reported. But the overall employment gains in March masked the loss of another 16,000 manufacturing jobs — the ninth straight month of shed factory jobs — as well as a rare cut in business services jobs for accountants and temporary employees.
"The latest job numbers show an economy that is effectively absorbing the blows from the residential and mortgage sectors," said Bernard Baumohl, managing director of the Economic Outlook Group, an economic advisory firm in Princeton Junction, N.J.
Job growth averaged a "respectable" 152,000 a month in the first quarter, which is down from last year's 188,500 pace but consistent with the more subdued growth of the economy, he said.
Wages continued to grow moderately, bringing the yearly gain for average hourly workers to 4 percent. Both the wage gains and the unemployment rate are at levels attained at the end of the last expansion in 2001, signaling that the job market remains fairly tight despite a slackening of economic growth since last spring.
"The economic outlook is quite bright, and the probability of recession is still negligible" as long as consumers continue to gain jobs and income, Mr. Baumohl said.
Source: http://www.washingtontimes.com/business/20070406-103239-7292r.htm
-
Notice ya had to go to the Washington TIMES to get that, and not the Post or the NY Times? I expect the Today Show to do a story about how a lot of folks just haven't been helped by this economy for some reason....in the 90's, good news wasn't difficult to find about a somewhat LESS vibrant economy. Perhaps if we think REAL hard..we can figure out why:rolleyes:
Ah.. the Post DID bury an article in the business section about the unemployment rate dropping for 2nd month in a row...no wait...it's still bad news:
Despite the good news, economists predict that the economy will slow later this year, as manufacturing continues to weaken and the housing slump takes its toll on jobs. Zandi pointed to a loss of 12,300 jobs in employment services last month, including temporary workers, who tend to be among the first let go when business gets tough.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/04/06/AR2007040601921.html
-
Hi Rip,
Sadly it really doesn't matter. The jobless rate could fall to 1% and be made up entirely of the congenitally unemployable and it still wouldn't help the administration a bit. No administration, no matter how successful, could survive long in the current climate. In politics, perception, not reality, is everything. As long as you are perceived favorably, you are doing well. The current administration will never be perceived favorably, they have the academy, the intelligentsia, the press, Hollywood, and now most of the government constantly churning out negative information about them on a constant basis. For instance, today NPR greeted the positive employment news with several pieces on unemployment amongst minorities and how the government doesn't care. This was followed by a piece about how the figures themselves can still be interpreted in a way that makes them less cheery.
The fact that if the figures had come out during the tenure of Bill Clinton they would have been greeted with unanimous front page tub-thumping approval is never considered. With Bush, no news is ever or can be good news. And when the news is negative, there is literally no bottom to how bad it can be. We have gotten to the point where the President can be blamed, for instance, not only for the results of a Hurricane, but for the Hurricane itself. At one time a reporter who took that line would have been considered a crazed moonbat political hack, going beyond even the vitriol heaped on American presidents by say, Pravda. Today, that kind of thing is mainstream and thoroughly passe.
It seems to me that while conservatives may have won the cold-war against the Soviets, they have lost the war against socialism at home and abroad. Conservatism as a western political viewpoint is simply viewed as evil, heartless, and incapable of producing any kind of good in most of the world. Generations now have been raised to think that, and it isn't changing. Given enough time, it will be as unpopular to say "I'm a conservative" as it is to say "I'm a Nazi." I've spent time in places where most people already think they're synonyms.
-
very good observations written very eloquently, Seagoon.
-
Hmm, unemployment down. Foreclosures at an all time high. What does this tell you?
-
That the scam artists in the mortgage industry made a crap load of money loaning money to people that really don't qualify to own a house with a vicious adjustable mortgage?
That utimately the US taxpayer will end up paying for this mistake while the perpetrators of this sub-prime mortgage fiasco sit on their yatchs in the Carribbean sipping Mai-Tais and wondering how the poor folks are doing?
Just a guess.
-
McJobs
-
McTheft, much like the savings and loan scandal.
-
Remind me, who was behind that?
-
Unemployment rate down dispite all those illegal Mexicans.:eek: ;)
-
Well, if you're talking about the Keating 5, that would be one Republican and four Democrats.
In 1989, the Lincoln Savings and Loan Association of Irvine, Calif., collapsed. Lincoln's chairman, Charles H. Keating Jr., was faulted for the thrift's failure. Keating, however, told the House Banking Committee that the FHLBB and its former chief Edwin J. Gray were pursuing a vendetta against him. Gray testified that several U.S. senators had approached him and requested that he ease off on the Lincoln investigation. It came out that these senators had been beneficiaries of $1.3 million (collective total) in campaign contributions from Keating.
This allegation set off a series of investigations by the California government, the United States Department of Justice, and the Senate Ethics Committee. The ethics committee's investigation focused on five senators: Alan MacG. Cranston (D-Calif.); Dennis W. DeConcini (D-Ariz.); John H. Glenn Jr. (D-Ohio); John S. McCain III (R-Ariz.); and Donald W. Riegle Jr. (D-Mich), who became known as the Keating Five.
After months of testimony revealed that all five senators acted improperly to differing degrees, the senators continually said they were following the status quo of campaign funding practices. In August 1991, the committee concluded that Cranston, DeConcini, and Riegle's conduct constituted substantial interference with the FHLBB's enforcement efforts and that they had done so at the behest of Charles Keating. The committee recommended censure for Cranston and criticized the other four for "questionable conduct."
If you're trying to sling poo RPM, it has a funny way of sticking to both sides of our corrupt political process.
-
The answer I was looking for is "conservatives". This was during the heyday of the "Born Again" religious right movement. Keating was a prime example of their hypocrisy.
-
Funny then that 4 of the Keating 5 were... Democrats.
Look, crooks are crooks, on both sides of the political spectrum. Or are you going to type with a straight face that this sub-prime loan thing is a vast right wing conspiracy?
It's a conspiracy to make money by making loans that had no hope in hell of being paid off. Think any liberals made money on these deals? Or is it all just the bad ole conservatives?
-
In other news (anywhere) the local plant is closing and putting thousands of workers out of work in favor of a "global economy" and the desire by big business to exploit foriegn labor for pennies on the dollar while enjoying little to no environmental regulations.
film at 11
-
When they figure out Unemployment do they just tally up jobs.What Im getting at is unempoyment down because Rite-Aid opened a bunch of new stores paying people at min wage.I bought my house around 7 years ago at 69k.In just the last few years its value has gone up too 150k.Im in manufacturing.I have an "ok" payin job.I feel bad for the young guys.They want to buy houses but theres no way they will be able to afford it.I hit tight spots payin my mortgage.
Pipz
-
Charles Keating (the one doing the actual damage) was the posterboy of the conservatives and religious rightwingers. Remember, the deregulation that allowed Keating to do the damage was championed by conservatives including Ronald Reagan.
The Keating 5 were the congressmen that were attempting to help Keating and those like him that were doing the actual damage. How John McCain and John Glenn kept from becoming the original Duke Cunningham is nothing short of a miracle.
-
Keating was an unelected business man? (Also a very poor investor)
-
Keating was just a crook, nothing more, nothing less. Are you saying there are no liberal crooks?
Again, in this recent sub-prime scam, are you prepared to say the perps are all conservatives and none are liberals?
The point is they are all crooks. The conservative/liberal angle is immaterial; they're thieves no matter what their political persuasion.
-
Originally posted by rpm
McJobs
That us SOOOOOOooooo 1980's
Wages continued to grow moderately, bringing the yearly gain for average hourly workers to 4 percent. Both the wage gains and the unemployment rate are at levels attained at the end of the last expansion in 2001, signaling that the job market remains fairly tight despite a slackening of economic growth since last spring.
-
Originally posted by rpm
McJobs
Actually thats not true.
Overall income is up 4% across the board and not just in the lower paying jobs
"The economy ended up adding 32,000 more jobs in January and February combined than the government estimated a month ago. Economists found that encouraging in assessing the health of the job market and the overall economy.
Workers' paychecks grew last month.
Average hourly earnings climbed to $17.22, up from $16.55 a year earlier. That represented a solid 4 percent increase." -By JEANNINE AVERSA, AP Economics Writer
I dont know of too many McDonalds that pay even $16.55 per hour.
-
Originally posted by Toad
Keating was just a crook, nothing more, nothing less. Are you saying there are no liberal crooks?
Again, in this recent sub-prime scam, are you prepared to say the perps are all conservatives and none are liberals?
The point is they are all crooks. The conservative/liberal angle is immaterial; they're thieves no matter what their political persuasion.
I wouldn't be surprised if ANY politician got caught with their hand in the cookie jar. But, I'll wager if you get to the root of the scandal and follow the money there are conservatives doing the dirty work. What I can't stand is the hypocrisy.
-
America started to fall when the Federal Reserve was formed.
-
Originally posted by DREDIOCK
Actually thats not true.
Overall income is up 4% across the board and not just in the lower paying jobs
Average hourly earnings climbed to $17.22, up from $16.55 a year earlier. That represented a solid 4 percent increase." -By JEANNINE AVERSA, AP Economics Writer
What did the cost of living do during that same period? The average is also bumped by a spike in oil and gas jobs. Those are not permanent. People here where the boom started are already starting to brace for that bubble to burst.
-
Originally posted by rpm
What did the cost of living do during that same period? The average is also bumped by a spike in oil and gas jobs. Those are not permanent. People here where the boom started are already starting to brace for that bubble to burst.
the wage increase was higher then the cost of living which rose about 3%
the rise in jobs was pretty much across the board
"But there were many more job winners than losers. Construction jobs led the way, especially for contractors and for commercial building. Retailers, health care providers, educational services and leisure and hospitality companies were among those boosting their payrolls."
-
Originally posted by rpm
What I can't stand is the hypocrisy.
Then I'd think your posts in this thread would have you very upset. :)
-
Originally posted by rpm
I wouldn't be surprised if ANY politician got caught with their hand in the cookie jar. But, I'll wager if you get to the root of the scandal and follow the money there are conservatives doing the dirty work. What I can't stand is the hypocrisy.
That's why conservatives will always rule the business world and liberals will merely rule college campuses where their effectiveness, or lack thereof, cannot readily be measured:rofl
-
Originally posted by DREDIOCK
the wage increase was higher then the cost of living which rose about 3%
So the net was a 1% increase.
Toad, to which post do you refer? While my views are scattergun compared to most, I'm very consistant in those views.
-
I'd say your view that the consevatives are always the thieves.
I find it hard to believe that you really believe that.
If you don't believe that, I believe the hypocrisy is evident in this thread.
:)
-
Originally posted by rpm
So the net was a 1% increase.
Toad, to which post do you refer? While my views are scattergun compared to most, I'm very consistant in those views.
Alot of places. In fact most places I've seen that give cost of living raises do not give any more then the incrse in the cost of living.
In fact During the 90's I actually worked at a place where the annual cost of living wage increase often didnt even meet the rise in the cost of living.
Remember this isnt the runaway bubble economy of the 90s either where everyone lost their minds, and eventually their shirts based largely on illusion paying 3 times more then stocks were worth.
There isnt a HUGE bubble to burst. Its more moderate growth and much more responcable growth which in the long run is much better then giant spikes upwards.
Giant spkes upwards tend to lead to sudden giant spikes downwards as is well indicated by the events of the 80s (Regan /Bush Sr administrations) and the 90s (Clinton Administration)
-
Originally posted by Toad
I'd say your view that the consevatives are always the thieves.
I find it hard to believe that you really believe that.
If you don't believe that, I believe the hypocrisy is evident in this thread.
:)
Heh.
They're all theives.
All you have to do is look at the state govenrments of New Jersey and Lousiana to see that republicans have no monopoly on theivery and curruption
They are the ultimate organised crime
-
I'd say your view that the consevatives are always the thieves.
I never said that. You were talking about the mortgage bubble and the S & L's. So was I.
Dred I was talking about the actual cost of living, not a cost of living wage increase. A 1% net over the actual cost of living is good. Not great, not spectacular, but good. And I agree, greed knows no party lines.
-
Originally posted by rpm
I never said that. You were talking about the mortgage bubble and the S & L's. So was I.
Dred I was talking about the actual cost of living, not a cost of living wage increase. A 1% net over the actual cost of living is good. Not great, not spectacular, but good. And I agree, greed knows no party lines.
The answer I was looking for is "conservatives". This was during the heyday of the "Born Again" religious right movement. Keating was a prime example of their hypocrisy.
--Do ya even know if Keating WAS a conservative? I know Nixon appointed him to an anti-porn thing that LBJ started, but Nixon appointed some liberal judges as well
-
Originally posted by bj229r
--Do ya even know if Keating WAS a conservative? I know Nixon appointed him to an anti-porn thing that LBJ started, but Nixon appointed some liberal judges as well
Keating was the King of Konservatives.
-
Originally posted by rpm
Keating was the King of Konservatives.
based upon what?
-
RPM says so. That should be enough. Conservatives are evil. How can you be so foolish as to not see that?
-
Enjoy it while it lasts.
Possible senerio:
Congress manages to force President to pull troops out of Iraq, (Remember, it was popular opinion, Congress, and prevalent 'war fever' that allowed President to send them in in the first place under weak reasoning)
leaving them to the mess that we, for the most part, created ourselves (not enough troops initially deployed, disbanding the Iraqi military and police forces entirely, not securing munitions depots all over the country so they could be raided and later used against the troops).
Lid comes off the region as everyone struggles to fill the power gap and become the dominate power in the region. Sunni, Shiia, Kurd, Secular, Hard line, tribal, terrorists, clan, Iams, Ayatollahs, militias..... it all comes apart.
Price of sweet crude jumps to $150 a barrel amid the destruction of a few oil tankers and burning oil fields. Look at what the capture of a few British Marines did to world wide oil prices? What will the deployment of mines in the Gulf, anti-ship missiles, burning oil wells, and open conflict throughout the region to on the stock market?
Unemployment jumps to 25% as western economies collapse.
Boo!!!!
-
Originally posted by tedrbr
Unemployment jumps to 25% as western economies collapse.
Boo!!!!
so then you are saying all the illegals will go home because there is no work? See there is some good in this.
oh , and china will lose over half of it's export business (USA) and suffer a deep recession.
and with the collapse the there will be a drop in CO2 emissions and global warming will not destroy the world.
yeah, win win.
-
Originally posted by Ripsnort
Nice economic news that shows how well our economy is doing with a Republican in charge. :aok
Source: http://www.washingtontimes.com/business/20070406-103239-7292r.htm
Define what the .gov considers "unemployed", politicians like to change definitions to suit themselves.
During the 1980s the Government changed the definition of "unemployed" from those who "claim", to those who "register" unemployment... and guess what?, the stats changed. Many unemployed people vanished since they did not register as "unemployed".. just saying "I don't have a job" wasn't good enough for bureaucrats who demanded a form be filled out. At the same time those under 18 were removed from the unemployment numbers, unless they had a job.. then they were included.
The Government also excluded people in work-related training and added them to the so called "workforce" generating a technical fall in unemployment rates.
-
Originally posted by bj229r
based upon what?
Umm, history? Seriously, Google is your friend. If that's too hard, watch The People vs Larry Flint.
-
The unemployment rate fell to a five-year low of 4.4 percent as job growth picked up to 180,000 last month — a show of strength that bolstered hopes that the economy will endure the turmoil in the housing and mortgage markets without major harm.
Above 11% in my county.
-
I feel a person is a failure at life once he pokes the moniker "Politician" to his/her name.
-
Amazing watching the liberals and Bush haters close their eyes, put their hands over their ears and mumble "bush is bad, bush is bad" to drown out any positive information that might reflect well on the administration. Not surprising that none rise to answer Toads questions.
-
Originally posted by Lye-El
Above 11% in my county.
Learn how to build better cars ;) :D
-
So the boom of the 90's was a fake bubble caused by the internet, but the boom of the 80's and 2000's were both due to republican administrations?
got it..
-
Originally posted by rpm
Umm, history? Seriously, Google is your friend. If that's too hard, watch The People vs Larry Flint.
The People vs Larry Flint is a reference source? Common knowledge that Keating was anti-porn, and worked with a government agency under Nixon, but porn victimizes women, and that view is typically construed as liberal.
We DO know this: He had somewhat more influence with Democrats than with Republicans: (ahem--McCain is the only Republican--one might conclude his political allegiance is to the green kind ;)
Some regulators noted the danger and pushed for more oversight, but Congress refused. Some of this may be due to the Keating Five, five Senators (Dennis DeConcini, Alan Cranston, John Glenn, Don Riegle and Keating's good friend John McCain) who had received some $300,000 from Keating in the 1980s. They later met twice with regulators who were investigating American Continental Corp., in an attempt to end the investigation. (In 1990, they would be rebuked to various degrees by the Senate Ethics Committee.)
-
Ok, if your too lazy or incompetent to use Google...
Charles Humphrey Keating Jr. (born December 4, 1923 in Cincinnati, Ohio) is a United States lawyer, banker, and felon convicted of fraud in the savings and loan scandal of 1989.
A conservative Roman Catholic active in the Republican Party, he was formerly involved in anti-pornography efforts. His brother, William J. Keating, was a Republican Congressman from Ohio.
In the late 1950s, Keating founded the Cincinnati anti-pornography organization Citizens for Decent Literature, later Citizens for Decency through Law. In 1960 he testified against pornography before Congress.
In 1964 – 1965, he produced the movie Perversion for Profit featuring announcer George Putnam. It was a survey of then-available pornography, and an attempt to link pornography to the decline of culture and to the depravity of youth.
In 1969, President Richard Nixon appointed Keating to the President's commission on pornography, which had been begun under Nixon's predecessor, Lyndon B. Johnson. Keating unsuccessfully attempted to stop publication of the commission's rather liberal recommendations with a restraining order. Failing in that effort, he filed a dissenting report, stating "One can consult all the experts he chooses, can write reports, make studies, etc., but the fact that obscenity corrupts lies within the common sense, the reason, and the logic of every man."
Keating was also instrumental in the ineffective obscenity prosecution of pornographer Larry Flynt in 1976 in Cincinnati.
Yep, he's about as liberal as they come, eh?
-
Originally posted by midnight Target
So the boom of the 90's was a fake bubble caused by the internet, but the boom of the 80's and 2000's were both due to republican administrations?
got it..
Never said that.
Just was pointing out it happpens in both parties
and while we may be in somewhat of a boom in the 2000s we dont have the huge spikes upwards we had in the 80s and 90s
-
Originally posted by rpm
Ok, if your too lazy or incompetent to use Google...
Yep, he's about as liberal as they come, eh?
'active'--wtf is 'active'? what office did he hold--what exactly did he do that could be viewed as 'active'?-- Most businessmen donate equally to both parties--(good sense) --(he OBVIOUSLY donted a lot to the 4 Democrat senators)--Catholics split evenly on Democrat/Republican voting, and being anti-porn isn't exactly heresy--lotta folks on both sides of the aisle would concur that porn has damaged society, and women in particular. Just because you have a seething hatred of conservatives doesn't mean his politics had watermelon to do with his actions. The most significant thing Wickipedia had to say about the guy's life was that he spent a few decades being VERY anti-porn--apparently some time later he became very PRO-money-anyFthewayicangetit
-
Originally posted by DREDIOCK
Learn how to build better cars ;) :D
Think Detroit encompasses all of Michigan? I've only been to Detroit area twice in my life and one of those was a Army provided bus ride to the inprocessing station many moons ago. And I don't plan on going again.
-
Originally posted by Lye-El
Think Detroit encompasses all of Michigan? I've only been to Detroit area twice in my life and one of those was a Army provided bus ride to the inprocessing station many moons ago. And I don't plan on going again.
Typically they measure unemployment at the government level by state. Michigan is higher than average.
Table A. States with unemployment rates significantly differ-
ent from that of the U.S., February 2007, seasonally adjusted
--------------------------------------------------------------
| February 2007
State | rate
--------------------------------------------------------------
United States .......................| 4.5
|
Alabama .............................| 3.3
Alaska ............................. .| 6.1
Colorado..................... ........| 3.8
Delaware ............................| 3.4
District of Columbia ................| 5.8
Florida .............................| 3.3
Hawaii ............................. .| 2.3
Idaho ............................. ..| 2.8
Iowa ............................. ...| 3.3
Kentucky ............................| 5.7
Maryland ............................| 3.8
Massachusetts................ ........| 5.3
Michigan ............................| 6.6
Mississippi .........................| 6.7
Montana .............................| 2.5
Nebraska ............................| 2.9
New Hampshire .......................| 3.7
New Mexico ..........................| 3.5
North Dakota ........................| 3.2
South Carolina ......................| 6.1
South Dakota ........................| 3.4
Utah ............................. ...| 2.3
Vermont .............................| 3.9
Virginia ............................| 2.9
Wyoming .............................| 2.3
--------------------------------------------------------------
-
Originally posted by Ripsnort
Typically they measure unemployment at the government level by state. Michigan is higher than average.
True. But the state can vary widely. Urban and rural even greater variations .
Michigan ............................| 6.6
MICHIGAN COUNTIES RANKED BY UNEMPLOYMENT RATE
JANUARY 2007
Montcalm County
12.2%
So depending where you are at, it can be great time, or not so good. Credit will be claimed by political parties were advantageous, blame assigned were not.
-
Montcalm has always been high for some reason but the property values on Crystal lake sure went thru the roof.
shamus