http://m.nbcnews.com/business/economywatch/jobs-data-shows-economy-still-fighting-shape-1C7488578
Lowest unemployment rate in 4 years. 4 years ago GWB was president.
Lowest unemployment rate in 4 years. 4 years ago GWB was president.
7.7
- Thread starter Jarod
- Start date
SmarterthanYou
rebel
Unemployment Plunges to 3.8% for Government Workers; Government Adds 35,000 Jobs in November, 544,000 Since July
so basically, the stats look good, but it's going to kill the economy in the long run.
so basically, the stats look good, but it's going to kill the economy in the long run.
cawacko
Well-known member
7.7 is still pretty shitty the far out from the end of the actual recession:
Just heard Jim Cramer interviewed on the Today Show (I feel the need to state for the record I do not watch the Today Show but the Misses has it on in her room so I heard this when I walked in there) and he claimed this was unmitigated good news and that we are having a mini boom in job creation.
Jim Cramer wants to trumpet good news to prop up the stock market in advance of a big sell off due to the likelihood of a rise in the capital gains rates next year. Don't get me wrong. It isn't bad news, but if job creation keeps this pace (without setback) we won't get to prior full employment for a very very long time and we're already pretty far out from the end of the recession.
Mott the Hoople
Sweet Jane
Doesn't this graph rather contradict Keynesian economic theory that Government should increase hiring during a recesion?Here's government employment since Obama took office:
Mott the Hoople
Sweet Jane
How the fuck can they continue to have that guy on TV considering what he did during the credit default swap drevitive crises where Cramer was encouraging investment in banks loaded with these toxic assets. Cramer either did that knowing he was scaming people into investing in these toxic stocks or he's flat out incompetent. I seriously doubt that it's the later.
It actually can support Keynesian theory. Keynesians would say that we have a weak recovery because the government, instead of increasing consumption of goods and services as it should do during a recession to bring about a robust recovery, has actually acted as a further drag on demand by decreasing consumption of goods and services.
canceled.2021.1
#AMERICAISDEAD
They have him on because he is a shill for your boy Obuttface.
canceled.2021.1
#AMERICAISDEAD
Yes, awesome news. 540,000 people dropped out of the work force. You must be proud
Mott the Hoople
Sweet Jane
Sorry, I should have stated my question more clearly. I should have asked "Doesn't this graph indicate that "this administrations actions" rather contradict Keynesian economic theory..........?"
Mott the Hoople
Sweet Jane
Well they are all probably hanging out at your Trailer Park, so you should be in a position to know.
Federal government employment has been about flat overall. The real losses are at the state and local level, which the stimulus bill tried to address with state and local aid. The problem was that it wasn't enough and efforts to increase state and local aid failed. Here's state and local government employment since January 2009:
The red line is local government employment. Blue line is state.
Mott the Hoople
Sweet Jane
Gotcha.....and local government employment is heavily dependent on State funding. So in other words, at the Federal level, Keynesian principles were applied but were to little to be very affective but were probably as much as the administration could obtain under the circumstances?Federal government employment has been about flat overall. The real losses are at the state and local level, which the stimulus bill tried to address with state and local aid. The problem was that it wasn't enough and efforts to increase state and local aid failed. Here's state and local government employment since January 2009:
The red line is local government employment. Blue line is state.
It does. It is one of the reasons I've said here that Obama is no Keynesian. Another is the way "stimulus" was spent mainly on things other than infrastructure. Most notably, the absence of shovel-ready jobs that he kept promising then joked about later during a jobs conference.
I'm hoping the jobs come back regardless of policy. Growth is what will bring the revenues that can bring us out of this mess, if we stop them from overspending. During good times Keynesian policy tells us to pay down the debt, we haven't been Keynesian in the US or largely in Europe, since 1960...
We should have been upgrading our electric grid, we should have been rebuilding bridges, we should have been burying electric lines so that snowstorms and hurricanes don't kill all our power... We should have been throwing everything, yes even solar, at getting off the foreign energy teat rather than ignoring coal and natural gas...
The inability of a longer view from our politicians has been incredibly disappointing to me.
Mott the Hoople
Sweet Jane
I agree with you in principle with sime minor exceptions. We haven't really been Keynesians since the 70's. Supply side theory has dominated since about 1980. I'd also say we've been ignoring infrastructure for about the last 30 years or longer too.
I'd like to see a very large amount of money that is being saved from military reduction, with the end of the Iraq war and Afghanistan winding down, into infrastructure. Particularly improvements to highways, the electrical grid, broad band capacity, R&D, and navigable water way improvements. That would end the slow recovery from the recession real quickly. There also long term improvements that would reap big dividends and are worth the investment even if we have to raise taxes to do so.
i thought there was an earthquake.
Mott the Hoople
Sweet Jane
There was. Northern Japan. It wasn't 7.7 though.