As I see it through my reading glasses, we are in trouble.

[Neubarth]

I have posted information from the Large Scale Lay-Off list before. The info for May has reached the highest level since this statistic was created in 1995, according to CNN.
http://money.cnn.com/2009/06/23/news/eco....on=money_latest

As I keep yelling, this is just another indication that the economy is rapidly falling. There are no signs that it is righting itself, and obviously no signs of RECOVERY, no matter how many Green Shoots the Obama Minions say are out there.

I have pointed out that the U.S. government has been very successful in duping market “sheeple” through publishing totally fraudulent monthly jobs reports. With the U.S. economy losing roughly 2.5 million jobs each month. (See my post about 25,000,000 people lost their jobs in the past 12 months.)

This corrupt government claimed that only 345,000 jobs were lost in May.

The sad fact is that the unemployment rate continues soaring higher each month.
The “mass lay-offs” are at record levels.
Numerous state governments across the U.S. are slashing spending to meet budget shortfalls (i.e slashing jobs)!!!

The Obama administration reports on the economy consistently lack connection to sanity or even semi rational thinking.

I see a job rate fall that is almost linear. In the past month, I have been all over California looking at the unemployment situation. The lost jobs here are increasing at an even greater rate month after month. It is very ugly out there, and the general public seems to be oblivious to how bad it is.

In looking at Job Loss charts in textbooks about The Great Depression, I get the distinct impression that we are losing jobs at almost the same rate as 1929 and 1930. As we saw last week, there is no moderating of the unemployment situation. It just keeps getting worse regardless of the Obama trickery with the numbers and lack of basic arithmetic skill.

Wages have started falling as people displaced in one job are taking lower wages in their new job. Let’s face it, “Any Job is better than No Job.” (Something I have been telling my young adult kids for the past year, and they still do not have real jobs.)

Now, take those falling wages and add them to the unemployment and the cut off of liberal credit card distribution by the major banks, and we are going to see a tremendous collapse in spending. Hell, some people are actually saving for a rainy day that may be just a few days off. We are a Service Sector Economy. More money changes hands for services than any other transactions even though we are still the leading Industrial Country in the world (Twice the size of Red China).

Well, with less employment and less credit and lower wages, we will be paying for less and less services in the future. Why order a pizza when you can make spaghetti for the forth time this week? “Bring Grandma back from Shady Hills Rest home and give her the back bedroom. We can not afford to keep her in Shady Hills anymore.”
Unfortunately, when we cut back on our services, other service sector employees get laid off and they don’t pay for services any more. Can you say “Potential Layoff Avalanche?”

Obama’s Stimulus Package is puny when compared to the reduction of spending that has already hit the US. If you look at the numbers, Obama’s efforts are puny in comparison. So, how is that going to lift us out of this Depression?

Did you know that the housing value collapse is several times worse than the decline during the Great Depression? In looking at the charts, our collapse looks to be about 2.5 times as bad. I need new reading glasses, so it might even be worse. That is a lot of money that just evaporated, and might not come back in the next few years. Of course, if we pump money into the economy, we can have inflation, and that will restore the numerical value of those homes, Unfortunately that won’t restore the buying power that one could have had if they sold the house and bought gold or any other commodity. We have lost lots of our savings and are still in debt.

Gosh, that sounds just like the United States government as well. Sadly, the United States currently has more than $60 TRILLION in public and private debt!

http://www.bullionbullscanada.com/i...us-versus-china&catid=51:commentary&Itemid=99

That is more than every other country in the world combined. In addition, just as tens of millions of U.S. “baby-boomers” begin to retire, the U.S. has close to $100 TRILLION in “unfunded future liabilities”, with an estimated twenty Trillion of those dollars supposedly being paid out to U.S. baby-boomers over the next decade.

Folks, we are in trouble and I have seen only one green shoot. Everything else is fertilizer.

 

[Paulie]

I don't know Neubarth, in my travels the past few months, I've seen an incredible amount of consumerism. Restaurants are still packed, mall parking lots are filled, movies are selling out, etc.

I live in a summer tourist area, and there's no shortage of tourism this year. Still the same damn traffic congestion from the typical summer invasion here. And I don't just see this where I live, I see it in other surrounding states where I've travelled to the past couple months. If anything, the complaints I've heard from merchants in my area are more about the unusually high amount of rain we've gotten this spring than anything else, because that tends to cut down on the weekend tourist influx.

If there's a recession that's really THAT BAD, I just don't see it. Someone's getting money from SOMEWHERE.

 

[Neubarth]

I don't know Neubarth, in my travels the past few months, I've seen an incredible amount of consumerism. Restaurants are still packed, mall parking lots are filled, movies are selling out, etc.

I live in a summer tourist area, and there's no shortage of tourism this year. Still the same damn traffic congestion from the typical summer invasion here. And I don't just see this where I live, I see it in other surrounding states where I've travelled to the past couple months. If anything, the complaints I've heard from merchants in my area are more about the unusually high amount of rain we've gotten this spring than anything else, because that tends to cut down on the weekend tourist influx.

If there's a recession that's really THAT BAD, I just don't see it. Someone's getting money from SOMEWHERE.

Dude! There are still a lot of people who have jobs. And even most of the jobless still have benefits. Life is still good if you are employed. Hell, some of those people who still have jobs are even considering buying one of those foreclosed properties at an auction for an investment. For them, the world is wonderful.

I went through the past four recessions without a worry in the world. I had a job. I still have a job and am not worried for myself, but I am worried for my country.

 

[Dis]

How come you can wear reading glasses, but not clothes to post?

Oh, and black socks NEVER went with shorts of ANY color.

 

[wimpy77]

I don't know Neubarth, in my travels the past few months, I've seen an incredible amount of consumerism. Restaurants are still packed, mall parking lots are filled, movies are selling out, etc.

I live in a summer tourist area, and there's no shortage of tourism this year. Still the same damn traffic congestion from the typical summer invasion here. And I don't just see this where I live, I see it in other surrounding states where I've travelled to the past couple months. If anything, the complaints I've heard from merchants in my area are more about the unusually high amount of rain we've gotten this spring than anything else, because that tends to cut down on the weekend tourist influx.

If there's a recession that's really THAT BAD, I just don't see it. Someone's getting money from SOMEWHERE.

Dude! There are still a lot of people who have jobs. And even most of the jobless still have benefits. Life is still good if you are employed. Hell, some of those people who still have jobs are even considering buying one of those foreclosed properties at an auction for an investment. For them, the world is wonderful.

I went through the past four recessions without a worry in the world. I had a job. I still have a job and am not worried for myself, but I am worried for my country.

90% of people still have a job. the casinos where i live are packed and the hotels are full.

 

[Neubarth]

Actually, Whimpy, most of the people do not have jobs. The labor force is something like 155,000,000 out of 310,000,000. The labor force is about half of our population or about 65% or our population over 16. (MY numbers may not be exact, but they are from memory and I AM 62 and you know what that means about memory.)

Just the same, if unemployment is 10% of 155,000,000 that means 15,500,000 are unemployed who were working previously. The reality is that about 20% of the people who want to work or would work if there was any hope of a job, so we really have about 30,000,000 people who are able bodied but are not working real jobs.

That is very frightening.

 

[Neubarth]

How come you can wear reading glasses, but not clothes to post?

Oh, and black socks NEVER went with shorts of ANY color.

I sometimes sit quite nude to post if I am alone in my apartment. I am a nudist in the privacy of my own home in the summer. If somebody comes to the door, I slip the blue shorts on.

As regards BlackSocks, those were chemically treated socks for hiking in the mountains in Summer. They repelled insects. Worked good, too. Bought them from a shop in Russia. They were soaked in some kind of Vodka-Tar solution. For the first two times I wore them while hiking (white socks underneath) I felt like I was slightly drunk from the Vodka, but it might have been the tar. Hell, I'll try anything a time or two. I went back to a solution called 6-12 that I bought in Mexico. Bugs leave you alone, but bears think you smell pretty and get amorous. You have got to stand up straight and yell at them and say "I'm not that kind of guy!" and they will leave you alone.

 

[Paulie]

Actually, Whimpy, most of the people do not have jobs. The labor force is something like 155,000,000 out of 310,000,000. The labor force is about half of our population or about 65% or our population over 16. (MY numbers may not be exact, but they are from memory and I AM 62 and you know what that means about memory.)

Just the same, if unemployment is 10% of 155,000,000 that means 15,500,000 are unemployed who were working previously. The reality is that about 20% of the people who want to work or would work if there was any hope of a job, so we really have about 30,000,000 people who are able bodied but are not working real jobs.

That is very frightening.

I see help wanted signs all over around my area. Mostly for the kind of job that pays less than $10/hr, but what's worse, $10/hr or NOTHING?

When you say "would work", that's relative. That whole entitlement issue keeps people from accepting less money than they think they should be getting.

If you're jobless and you're hurting, go fucking deliver pizza. You can make pretty good money doing that.

Or sit home on your ass and complain about life, whatever works for you I guess, right?

 

[pinqy]

I have posted information from the Large Scale Lay-Off list before. The info for May has reached the highest level since this statistic was created in 1995, according to CNN.
http://money.cnn.com/2009/06/23/news/eco....on=money_latest

So why is this survey not bogus, yet the other BLS surveys are? Surely you're not claiming that the Unemployment figures are manipulated by "Obama stooges," yet the Mass Layoff survey, which comes from the same Office that puts out the Unemployment figures, is correct? That seems odd, even for you.

 

[pinqy]

Actually, Whimpy, most of the people do not have jobs. The labor force is something like 155,000,000 out of 310,000,000. The labor force is about half of our population or about 65% or our population over 16. (MY numbers may not be exact, but they are from memory and I AM 62 and you know what that means about memory.)

Closes enough. You at least show understanding of that.

Just the same, if unemployment is 10% of 155,000,000 that means 15,500,000 are unemployed who were working previously.

It means nothing of the sort. Unemployed does NOT mean you lost your job. It just means you didn't work during the survey period and are currently looking for work. Only about 10.5 million were working previously. About 3 million are coming back to the workforce after a period of absence and just under a million have never had a job before. (Table A-8 of the Employment Situation)

The reality is that about 20% of the people who want to work or would work if there was any hope of a job,

So reality is now a number you made up off the top of your head? Under the CPS, only about 8% of those Not in the Labor Force say they want a job (up from 7 % last year so a definite sign of decline) but 2/3 of them haven't looked for work in over a year so their opinion of the labor market is probably not very accurate. (Table A-13 of the Employment Situation.

 

[auditor0007]

While things are worse than we are being told, I do not see a continuing downward spiral. The entire market was overinflated. Housing prices soared due to speculation. Wealth was being created based purely on speculation, and people were overspending based on that false wealth.

What we are seeing now is a true adjustment, not only in housing prices but in wages also. This will be a good thing for the long term. Once we do bottom out, growth will be slow but steady and it will be based on actual real growth rather than speculation. Earnings across the board will likely remain much lower for businesses as well as individuals for some time to come. Those who are willing to work extra hard will still become successful, but we won't be seeing millionaires made overnight like we have for the past decade plus.

Despite lower wages, people are once again saving. During the run up in housing, no one had to save, because they were using overinflated equity as their savings. Now people are saving again because they are worried, and that is a very good thing. Eventually, those savings will amount to some real money, and then people will begin to spend again.

 

[Neubarth]

More of your insane gobbledegook, pinky. Nobody believes this crap you spout. You can use government doubletalk definitions all you want, and according to the government you would be right. The only problem is that you are posting to me as if you think I will believe those definitions. I don't buy that shit. It stinketh and none may abide the odor thereof.

My definition: "A man or woman is unemployed if they are mentally and physically capable of work and do not have full time job, but want one." I'd say that would put us way over 20 Million unemployed in the US. If we could actually interview the people I'd be willing to bet that my definition would put the unemployed at 30 to 35 Million. This country is in horrible shape. Most of these people are not eligible for unemployment compensation either, so are on food stamps and are living off of relatives or in deplorable conditions.

Actually, Whimpy, most of the people do not have jobs. The labor force is something like 155,000,000 out of 310,000,000. The labor force is about half of our population or about 65% or our population over 16. (MY numbers may not be exact, but they are from memory and I AM 62 and you know what that means about memory.)

Closes enough. You at least show understanding of that.

Just the same, if unemployment is 10% of 155,000,000 that means 15,500,000 are unemployed who were working previously.

It means nothing of the sort. Unemployed does NOT mean you lost your job. It just means you didn't work during the survey period and are currently looking for work. Only about 10.5 million were working previously. About 3 million are coming back to the workforce after a period of absence and just under a million have never had a job before. (Table A-8 of the Employment Situation)

The reality is that about 20% of the people who want to work or would work if there was any hope of a job,

So reality is now a number you made up off the top of your head? Under the CPS, only about 8% of those Not in the Labor Force say they want a job (up from 7 % last year so a definite sign of decline) but 2/3 of them haven't looked for work in over a year so their opinion of the labor market is probably not very accurate. (Table A-13 of the Employment Situation.

 

[Neubarth]

I have posted information from the Large Scale Lay-Off list before. The info for May has reached the highest level since this statistic was created in 1995, according to CNN.
http://money.cnn.com/2009/06/23/news/eco....on=money_latest

So why is this survey not bogus, yet the other BLS surveys are? Surely you're not claiming that the Unemployment figures are manipulated by "Obama stooges," yet the Mass Layoff survey, which comes from the same Office that puts out the Unemployment figures, is correct? That seems odd, even for you.

You have a very hard time accepting reality. Numbers reported from businesses have some validity. Fabricated ridiculous numbers from the Federal Government do not.

Numbers collected from the states about Unemployment Claims have validity. Those are actual people reporting their status in an effort to try to claim unemployment compensation. If they can not prove their former employment, they will not receive benefits. At least that is the way it worked when I left the Navy way back in 1973 and could not find a job. I expect that it is the same way today.

 

[pinqy]

You have a very hard time accepting reality. Numbers reported from businesses have some validity. Fabricated ridiculous numbers from the Federal Government do not.

But the Establishment Employment numbers also come from the businesses!!!! But you call those numbers bullshit too. For both Employment figures and Mass Layoffs, the business report them to BLS, who processes them and releases them. If the BLS manipulated the numbers as you claim, they could just as easily manipulate the Mass Layoff numbers.

 

[p kirkes]

Up until a couple of months ago, the economy in NW Louisiana was bumping along quite nicely.

The natural gas discoveries made some people millionaires overnight, others had to settle for a few thousand dollars for leasing their mineral rights. That includes public entities that owned land.

Homes values were increasing at about 3% per year with plenty of high paying jobs in the "oil/gas" patch. The oil/gas service industry were building shops/retail sale outlets all over the region. New home construction was flourishing.

There are also many apartment complexes being built across town, from affordable to extravagant.

That was then. The reality now is that GM has decided to close our modern truck assembly plant after telling us it would stay open, after pouring millions of dollars into it for improvements. About 2,000 good paying jobs gone by 2011.

GM support businesses, also will close, another 2,000 jobs lost. These are people who buy homes. Now that they will be unemployed, will probably try to sell their properties, flooding the market.

The natural gas market has nearly collapsed, drilling drastically cut back, royalties slowing, due to the market being saturated with product. Hundreds of jobs gone.

But the restaurants are still full, the movies have upped their popcorn/drink prices to the point of blatant robbery. The apartments will do well because people will not be able to afford the "American dream".

And yes, I would bring mom back home from assisted living except the wife says not "no, but hell no".

I'm saving, not spending, against an uncertain future, since I'm retired living on a fixed
income.

I'll be seventy tomorrow. However, I'm happy watching over two of the grandkids.

 

[pinqy]

More of your insane gobbledegook, pinky. Nobody believes this crap you spout.

And yet you never attempt to actualy show how I'm wrong, you just come out with the insults.

The only problem is that you are posting to me as if you think I will believe those definitions.

What's to believe? Those are the defintions. You can disagree with them all you want, but that doesn't change what they are. The definitions have changed slighlty over the years, and other countries use slightly different versions, but definitions are definitions. How do you not believe them? Do you think the government secretly uses an entirely different set of definitions? And you show zero understanding of what they are when you come up with nonsense like saying unemployed means you lost your job...which it doesn't.

"A man or woman is unemployed if they are mentally and physically capable of work and do not have full time job, but want one."

Ok. Why? What does that help show about the economy? First, how would you define "mentally and physically capable of work" and how would you verify it?

Secondly, it's extremely subjective....people might claim they want a job, but they could be lying. Or they might honestly want a job, but if they haven't actually looked for a job in 5 years, how are they different or have any different impact on the economy than someone who doesn't want job or is not capable of having a job?

Thirdly, you're excluding people who aren't working but want to work part-time. That's odd. Also including the Underemployed makes things very fuzzy: Person A works 34 hours a week but wants to work full time and Person B works 5 hours a week and is happy with that. By your definition A is Unemployed and B is Employed even though A works almost 7 times as many hours. Do you really think that's useful?

Fourthly, you're including people who are not available to work...students, people who look after their children or parents, etc, so that even if they were offered a job, they couldn't take it.

Economists have thought of all that before, and rejected it.

The reason the definition of Unemployed is "did not work, is available to work, and has actively looked for work in the last 4 weeks" is used is because it measures the number of people who are trying to find work and failing. That's an objective, clear, measure of the Labor Force. Actions, not desires. People who want a job but haven't looked recently are counted seperately, because it can be useful to look at potential sources of labor, but you can't really count someone who is not looking because no matter how good the economy is, they won't get a job unless they do start looking.

 

[AllieBaba]

Unemployment numbers are generated by those who have applied for unemployment benefits. So if someone quits or can't find a job, or is laid off and hasn't worked enough quarters, those people don't even get counted.

I'd love a link to evidence that 90 percent of all us citz. are employed. Because those sure aren't the numbers in my state.

 

[pinqy]

Unemployment numbers are generated by those who have applied for unemployment benefits. So if someone quits or can't find a job, or is laid off and hasn't worked enough quarters, those people don't even get counted.

Untrue...here's the official definition:

People are classified as unemployed if they meet all of the following criteria: They had no employment during the reference week; they were available for work at that time; and they made specific efforts to find employment sometime during the 4-week period ending with the reference week. Persons laid off from a job and expecting recall need not be looking for work to be counted as unemployed. The unemployment data derived from the household survey in no way depend upon the eligibility for or receipt of unemployment insurance benefits.
Technical Note for the CPS

It's a household survey and has nothing to do with UI benefits.

I'd love a link to evidence that 90 percent of all us citz. are employed. Because those sure aren't the numbers in my state.

Who on Earth is claiming that? The Official figure for May (because the June numbers aren't released until tomorrow) is approx 59.7% of the 16 and over population not in jail, mental institutions, or the military is employed. Perhaps you misunderstand what the Unemployment rate is..it's not a percentage of the population, it's a percentage of the Labor Force, which is defined as Unemployed + Employed. So the rate is Unemployed/(Employed + Unemployed).

Oh, and citizenship is irrelevant.