Jobs up 290,000

Obfuscate said:
Obviously you are not a banking expert.

We could have eaisily kept the money supply stable without TARP and therefore avoid the doom and gloom that happened in the Depression when we let the money supply fall by 1/3. TARP was a sliver compared to what the Federal Reserve had done with M2- Discount Window access ect. Suprised to hear Liberals agree that we need a Corpratist banking system and that the worst of greedy bankers need a bailout to help the middle class.
Click to expand...

I think that's becoming a tougher & tougher argument to make.

I also believe that you couldn't be more wrong about TARP. Had the gov't done nothing at that time, the U.S. economy likely would have lost much more than TARP cost.
 
I was hearing numbers as low as 50,000 prior to the release. The consensus was 50 to 100,000. Anybody who doesn't think 50,000 would have been crushing to the market needs to share the drugs with me. 150,000 would have been really good. 290,000 is awesome considering yestarday
 
Onceler said:
I also believe that you couldn't be more wrong about TARP. Had the gov't done nothing at that time, the U.S. economy likely would have lost much more than TARP cost.
Click to expand...

The TARP is like 5% of what the Federal Reserve has done. I don't agree with people that said "do nothing" because the Federal Reserve has made many good moves that staved of a possible Depression. The TARP only Socialized the Banks, not stabilize them. The Federal Reserve stabilized good banks but people don't understand the Fed so they just believe what the Politicians feed them.
 
Obfuscate said:
The TARP is like 5% of what the Federal Reserve has done. I don't agree with people that said "do nothing" because the Federal Reserve has made many good moves that staved of a possible Depression. The TARP only Socialized the Banks, not stabilize them. The Federal Reserve stabilized good banks but people don't understand the Fed so they just believe what the Politicians feed them.
Click to expand...

To me, TARP was more psychological (I also feel that way about the stimulus). Like it or not, Wall Street rules over the American economy. Business owners hire & fire according to the trends in the market.

Both TARP & the stimulus were about investor confidence, and stemming the bleeding. They did that, imo.

And no - I don't love that banks rule the world, but that's capitalism.
 
The Republicans are busy in back rooms recrafting the stragety for November...!
 
Obfuscate said:
Obviously you are not a banking expert.

We could have eaisily kept the money supply stable without TARP and therefore avoid the doom and gloom that happened in the Depression when we let the money supply fall by 1/3. TARP was a sliver compared to what the Federal Reserve had done with M2- Discount Window access ect. Suprised to hear Liberals agree that we need a Corpratist banking system and that the worst of greedy bankers need a bailout to help the middle class.
Click to expand...


Surprisingly, I believe in empirical evidence. Not untested message board theories by posters who read the Lyndon Larouch website, or the collected works of Ayn Rand.

The real world empirical evidence demonstrates to me that TARP did what it was supposed to do. Stabilize the financial system, and prevent a collapse. Message board theories and pontifications are fine, get back to me when you have some real world evidence that your theories actually worked.

I ain't no economic guru, but I think every sentient being realizes TARP was a stop gap measure, and a neccessary evil. It doesn't fix long term structural problems.

I'm glad conservatives "suddenly" have recognized what progressives have said for years, and that we are all New Dealers now: the financial system is under regulated, it needs more oversight, and the banks need to be broken up and returned to New Deal-type regulation. And I think, with regard to the Fed Reserve - there's a lot of common ground between true liberals and the few handful of sentient ron paul-type rightwingers: The federal reserve needs to be reformed.
 
what a douche supposedly econ major picking out the lagging indicator to bluster on. Jobs have been improving and finally at a good pace soon to be a roided up pace. GDP has been better than average. student fails or gets a D- Sorry
 
Topspin said:
I was hearing numbers as low as 50,000 prior to the release. The consensus was 50 to 100,000. Anybody who doesn't think 50,000 would have been crushing to the market needs to share the drugs with me. 150,000 would have been really good. 290,000 is awesome considering yestarday
Click to expand...

1) The consensus was 187k jobs added. 290k is still very strong compared to it, but your consensus number is way off.

2) Yesterday had NOTHING to do with the number. The 290k is not 'awesome' considering what occurred. In fact, the 290k number does not reflect the Greek situation at all. If numbers are strong next month, then it would be impressive given what has transpired over the past week.
 
Obfuscate said:
No, Capitalism allows Banks to Fail. Corpratism does not, like we have now.
Click to expand...

I won't argue that. To me, it's amazing what has happened just in the last decade or 2 as far as corporate influence & integration into our gov't.

I don't know what the solution is on that, though. The kind of pain the creative destruction you're talking about would have caused, or would cause, is kind of incomprehensible to me.
 
Superfreak said:
1) The consensus was 187k jobs added. 290k is still very strong compared to it, but your consensus number is way off.

2) Yesterday had NOTHING to do with the number. The 290k is not 'awesome' considering what occurred. In fact, the 290k number does not reflect the Greek situation at all. If numbers are strong next month, then it would be impressive given what has transpired over the past week.
Click to expand...

I heard 200,000 last week was consensus from the council of economist, then i heard the 165,000 number. This morning several economist were calling 50 to 150,000 so blow me on your worthless counter point.

As someone who was down nearly 80,000 yestarday at one point I'll call any better than expected news great you freaking republitard.
 
Topspin said:
I heard 200,000 last week was consensus from the council of economist, then i heard the 165,000 number. This morning several economist were calling 50 to 150,000 so blow me on your worthless counter point.

As someone who was down nearly 80,000 yestarday at one point I'll call any better than expected news great you freaking republitard.
Click to expand...

LMAO... you sure do get cranky when your stocks are down.

I was simply correcting you. When you hear an 'economist' give you a range like 50-150... they are not providing you with the consensus. They are providing you with a RANGE. The consensus was about 200k, but was revised to 187k as final predictions came in. As I stated, the 290k is still VERY strong relative to the consensus numbers. I just wanted to provide you with an accurate picture.
 
Superfreak said:
LMAO... you sure do get cranky when your stocks are down.

I was simply correcting you. When you hear an 'economist' give you a range like 50-150... they are not providing you with the consensus. They are providing you with a RANGE. The consensus was about 200k, but was revised to 187k as final predictions came in. As I stated, the 290k is still VERY strong relative to the consensus numbers. I just wanted to provide you with an accurate picture.
Click to expand...

suck my dick moron, you bet I get cranky when my stocks are down. You know what the fuck I was talking about. Now your changing to very strong.
If it had come in at 50,000 I might have bought my first pair of depends today.:clink:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top