Chair of Obama's Council of Economic Advisors is out.

[Si modo]

Romer serves dismal for lunch. Pepto-Bismol for dessert?


By Dana Milbank
Washington Post Staff Writer
Thursday, September 2, 2010

Lunch at the National Press Club on Wednesday caused some serious indigestion.

It wasn't the food; it was the entertainment. Christina Romer, chairman of President Obama's Council of Economic Advisers, was giving what was billed as her "valedictory" before she returns to teach at Berkeley, and she used the swan song to establish four points, each more unnerving than the last:

She had no idea how bad the economic collapse would be. She still doesn't understand exactly why it was so bad. The response to the collapse was inadequate. And she doesn't have much of an idea about how to fix things.

....

At week's end, Romer will leave the council chairmanship after what surely has been the most dismal tenure anybody in that post has had: a loss of nearly 4 million jobs in a year and a half. That's not Romer's fault; the financial collapse occurred before she, and Obama, took office. But she was the president's top economist during a time when the administration consistently underestimated the depth of the economy's troubles - miscalculations that have caused Americans to lose faith in the president and the Democrats.

Romer had predicted that Obama's stimulus package would keep the unemployment rate at 8 percent or less; it is now 9.5 percent. One of her bosses, Vice President Biden, told Democrats in January that "you're going to see, come the spring, net increase in jobs every month." The economy lost 350,000 jobs in June and July.
ad_icon

This is why nearly two-thirds of Americans think the country is on the wrong track - and why Obama's efforts to highlight the end of U.S. combat in Iraq and the resumption of Middle East peace talks have little chance of piercing the gloom as voters consider handing control of Congress back to the Republicans.

....

washingtonpost.com

Wow. That level of cluelessness is just scary.

thread merge

 

[iamwhatiseem]

Just more of the same.
This administrations appointments have been alarming to say the least.
Throughout this year the best economist have (and this is unusual) been in solid agreement that 2010 was going to be stagnant at best, and could be worse than 2009.
....EXCEPT the administration. All along they have been preaching that the economy is "on the road to recovery"..."the summer of recovery"...etc.
It was a gamble to say these things at best.

 

[Si modo]

Just more of the same.
This administrations appointments have been alarming to say the least.
Throughout this year the best economist have (and this is unusual) been in solid agreement that 2010 was going to be stagnant at best, and could be worse than 2009.
....EXCEPT the administration. All along they have been preaching that the economy is "on the road to recovery"..."the summer of recovery"...etc.
It was a gamble to say these things at best.

Amazing stuff; borderline Orwellian/Department of Truth. I suppose now that she's stepping down, she can admit that it's bad.

I came to the conclusion that Obama is incompetent months ago and his choice in appointments simply adds more support for my conclusion.

I admire her frankness here, though.

 

[8537]

Just more of the same.
This administrations appointments have been alarming to say the least.
Throughout this year the best economist have (and this is unusual) been in solid agreement that 2010 was going to be stagnant at best, and could be worse than 2009.
....EXCEPT the administration. All along they have been preaching that the economy is "on the road to recovery"..."the summer of recovery"...etc.
It was a gamble to say these things at best.

2010 has been a bad year economically, but it is light years better than 2009.

 

[teapartysamurai]

I mean this is funny stuff, because Marc Steyn sat in for Rush on Rush's show, (because Rush is on vacation).

And Marc was joking about all the signs out there touting the stimulus, and that the only people "stimulated" were those making the signs.

And here this stupid woman proves Marc right!

On the administration's response and the Recovery Act: "Because the final bill was a mixture of hundreds of measures, many of which don't come with Recovery Act signs or easily identifiable links to the act, it is been hard for people to see what the act has done. But it is precisely because it works through existing programs and spreads funds widely that it could get out quickly and reap large benefits."

Christina Romer: Recession 'terrifying and so difficult to cure' - The Oval: Tracking the Obama presidency

Now THIS, this is a perfect example of liberal arrogance and contempt for you and me. We are sooooooooooooooooo stupid, that if we don't have a sign in front of us telling us Obama did it, we don't know "it's working."

We can't judge by the nearly 10% UNEMPLOYMENT RATE!!!!!!!!!!

Nooooooooooooo, we are like little children and we need a sign to tell us things are working!

How about a sign that says businesses are going to start hiring Ms. Romer???? You think THAT might convince people?

Dingbat! I'm glad she's leaving.



thread merge

 

[Big Black Dog]

What are they going to do with all of those signs when the projects they were put up for is completed? Sell them on eBay?

 

[iamwhatiseem]

Just more of the same.
This administrations appointments have been alarming to say the least.
Throughout this year the best economist have (and this is unusual) been in solid agreement that 2010 was going to be stagnant at best, and could be worse than 2009.
....EXCEPT the administration. All along they have been preaching that the economy is "on the road to recovery"..."the summer of recovery"...etc.
It was a gamble to say these things at best.

2010 has been a bad year economically, but it is light years better than 2009.

Based on what?
The GDP is not any better etc.
2010 is the year things stopped falling, yes, but it has not improved.
At least not in a meaningful way

 

[teapartysamurai]

What are they going to do with all of those signs when the projects they were put up for is completed? Sell them on eBay?

Who would buy them?

 

[8537]

Just more of the same.
This administrations appointments have been alarming to say the least.
Throughout this year the best economist have (and this is unusual) been in solid agreement that 2010 was going to be stagnant at best, and could be worse than 2009.
....EXCEPT the administration. All along they have been preaching that the economy is "on the road to recovery"..."the summer of recovery"...etc.
It was a gamble to say these things at best.

2010 has been a bad year economically, but it is light years better than 2009.

Based on what?
The GDP is not any better etc.

Huh?

2009.1 2009.2 2009.3 2009.4 2010.1 2010.2
14049.7 14034.5 14114.7 14277.3 14446.4 14575.0

It's not only "better" - it's a SAAR of over 500B better. and it has grown for four straight quarters.

 

[editec]

You know it doesn't matter all that much who mans the bridge of a ship of state which has had it keel stove in to hell

That ship is still going down.

If we want to save this nation (something that I'm reasonably sure the masters do NOT want to do) we'd have to change the way we do business and politics.

Anybody here think that Obama or whomsoever follows him is going to radically change those things?

No?

Then don your mae west, find your liferaft,( if you're lucky enough to have been assigned one at birth, or been smart and lucky enough to have created one for yourself in your lifetime) and be prepared to abandon ship or (for about 90% of us in steerage) to go down with the ship of state.

Don't feel too bad, citizens.

There's been plenty of citizens of other crumbling empires who went though this.

History is replete with this sort of death by hubris writ large.

 

[Si modo]

Apparently, there is a lot of 'misunderestimating' of the economy in this administration.

 

[iamwhatiseem]

2010 has been a bad year economically, but it is light years better than 2009.

Based on what?
The GDP is not any better etc.

Huh?

2009.1 2009.2 2009.3 2009.4 2010.1 2010.2
14049.7 14034.5 14114.7 14277.3 14446.4 14575.0

It's not only "better" - it's a SAAR of over 500B better. and it has grown for four straight quarters.

Depends on where you got those numbers, whether that is inflation adjusted or not etc.
Fact is - the GDP is basically flat for 2010 after inflationary adjustment - period.

 

[8537]

Based on what?
The GDP is not any better etc.

Huh?

2009.1 2009.2 2009.3 2009.4 2010.1 2010.2
14049.7 14034.5 14114.7 14277.3 14446.4 14575.0

It's not only "better" - it's a SAAR of over 500B better. and it has grown for four straight quarters.

Depends on where you got those numbers, whether that is inflation adjusted or not etc.
Fact is - the GDP is basically flat for 2010 after inflationary adjustment - period.

Those numbers are from the BEA. And inflation adjusted? In the current economy? the inflation rate has been hovering around near zero during that period.

That's not "flat" and it's a stark improvement over the previous year when the economy contracted at near-record rates.

 

[iamwhatiseem]

Huh?

2009.1 2009.2 2009.3 2009.4 2010.1 2010.2
14049.7 14034.5 14114.7 14277.3 14446.4 14575.0

It's not only "better" - it's a SAAR of over 500B better. and it has grown for four straight quarters.

Depends on where you got those numbers, whether that is inflation adjusted or not etc.
Fact is - the GDP is basically flat for 2010 after inflationary adjustment - period.

Those numbers are from the BEA. And inflation adjusted? In the current economy? the inflation rate has been hovering around near zero during that period.

That's not "flat" and it's a stark improvement over the previous year when the economy contracted at near-record rates.

We will agree to disagree...the revised GDP growth for the first 3 quarters is 1.6%...your numbers show better than 3%.

I could post 30 articles by reputable sites saying the same thing...I don't know where you are getting your numbers.
Probably from the White House.

 

[Granny]

It's worse than scary. I truly believe our current situation is the way it is by design - the "Progressives" have had decades to slowly bring about their "Hope for Change." They'd best be defined as "Regressives" because the ideology is regressive.

I had an experience yesterday of receiving a call from someone I didn't know so ignored it. He did leave a message that caused me to return his call. He was looking for a particular person because he had a job offer for the guy. We had a nice little exchange where he indicated the guy was in SC and I told him I was in TN and suggested he check out the area code - that jobs were too hard to come by to be sidelined by a wrong number. I hope he finds the guy.

It's scary as hell these days.

 

[Si modo]

It's worse than scary. I truly believe our current situation is the way it is by design - the "Progressives" have had decades to slowly bring about their "Hope for Change." They'd best be defined as "Regressives" because the ideology is regressive.

I had an experience yesterday of receiving a call from someone I didn't know so ignored it. He did leave a message that caused me to return his call. He was looking for a particular person because he had a job offer for the guy. We had a nice little exchange where he indicated the guy was in SC and I told him I was in TN and suggested he check out the area code - that jobs were too hard to come by to be sidelined by a wrong number. I hope he finds the guy.

It's scary as hell these days.

You did a good deed. I like that.

 

[8537]

Depends on where you got those numbers, whether that is inflation adjusted or not etc.
Fact is - the GDP is basically flat for 2010 after inflationary adjustment - period.

Those numbers are from the BEA. And inflation adjusted? In the current economy? the inflation rate has been hovering around near zero during that period.

That's not "flat" and it's a stark improvement over the previous year when the economy contracted at near-record rates.

We will agree to disagree...the revised GDP growth for the first 3 quarters is 1.6%...your numbers show better than 3%.

My numbers are from the bureau of economic analysis. Where are yours from?

I could post 30 articles by reputable sites saying the same thing...I don't know where you are getting your numbers.
Probably from the White House.

I told you where I got the numbers in my last post.

 

[Granny]

It's worse than scary. I truly believe our current situation is the way it is by design - the "Progressives" have had decades to slowly bring about their "Hope for Change." They'd best be defined as "Regressives" because the ideology is regressive.

I had an experience yesterday of receiving a call from someone I didn't know so ignored it. He did leave a message that caused me to return his call. He was looking for a particular person because he had a job offer for the guy. We had a nice little exchange where he indicated the guy was in SC and I told him I was in TN and suggested he check out the area code - that jobs were too hard to come by to be sidelined by a wrong number. I hope he finds the guy.

It's scary as hell these days.

You did a good deed. I like that.

Thank you very much. I try.

 

[loosecannon]

We will agree to disagree...the revised GDP growth for the first 3 quarters is 1.6%...your numbers show better than 3%.

I could post 30 articles by reputable sites saying the same thing...I don't know where you are getting your numbers.
Probably from the White House.

Actually the revised numbers for Q2 2010 were 1.6% while the first Q of 2010 actually was 3+%, and Q4 2009 was 5.4%