How will US economy ever recover?

[Douger]

what exactly is the harm of having millions of millionaires?
I'd ask you what model works better, but I know it's not out there.

With the coming hyperinflation, if you aren't one, you'll starve.
Walmart is all ready set up to be slop troughs for hungry murkins.

 

[topspin]

I agree, and inflation comes with growth.

 

[Toro]

I agree, and inflation comes with growth.

Sometimes, but not always.

 

[The Rabbi]

I agree, and inflation comes with growth.

Sometimes, but not always.

Not necessarily.
Zander posted a very good article explaining why the Fed's money creation was not inflationary. Made good points.

 

[Neubarth]

The collapse is here. The end is here.

 

[Douger]

The collapse is here. The end is here.

I agree Neub.
These fine young patriots defending FreeDumb and DemoNcrasy will be coming home to make sure you don't complain.
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hpMg393Imk4]YouTube - Gangs in the Military[/ame]

 

[editec]

So...

have we established as yet if the US economy is going to recover?

What are the benchmarks (that we can agree on, at least) that will tell us when we have recovered?

I propose that one of the benchmarks of recovery must be the (true) rate of unemployment.

What other metrics should we be looking at to establish the health of this economy?

Once we can agree on those, then I propose that we make the case for what numbers those benchmarks must reach to call our economy recovered or not.

Agreed?

I'm looking for your suggestions and thoughts on what numbers really matter here, folks.

 

[froggy]

Get an Independent administration.

 

[topspin]

I'll stick with the economist on this one. GDP
once it's growing enough unemployment takes care of itself.
It's this little concept they like to use, lagging indicator.

 

[froggy]

I'll stick with the economist on this one. GDP
once it's growing enough unemployment takes care of itself.
It's this little concept they like to use, lagging indicator.

Everytime i go uot i see crowds of people spending money, so it must be the greedy corp. refusing to make new hires, just over work the ones they have.

 

[editec]

I'll stick with the economist on this one. GDP
once it's growing enough unemployment takes care of itself.
It's this little concept they like to use, lagging indicator.

GDP is certainly one of those metrics that we ought to study, I quite agree, TS.

GDP is the grand design describing the landscape of the American economy.

But it lacks details--details that we ALSO need to understand in order to get what is really happening.

The GDP can go up, even while the majority of Americans' economic plight is going down.

So while GDP certainly is a metric we need to follow, by itself, it is not nearly enough.

How about personal and business bankruptsy filings?

Or how about aggregate stats on saving and indebtedness including standard deviations from the norm?

Economic disparity both in terms of incomes and net worths?

All those ALSO help us understand the state of economic affairs, yes?

 

[topspin]

yes, how bout educational attainment vs income.
the plight of the unskilled labor is going to get way worse before it gets better. That said doesn't mean the economy won't flourish.

 

[Zaburo]

I'll stick with the economist on this one. GDP
once it's growing enough unemployment takes care of itself.
It's this little concept they like to use, lagging indicator.

I believe its Okuns Law that says there is a direct relationship between unemployment and GDP. For every 1 percent unemployment there is a 2 percent loss of GDP. If you increase employment you will decrease GDP. We need to worry about employment first, GDP will take care of itself after the fact.


Consider consumer confidence. If people are worried they will lose their jobs, or are hearing horror stories about people losing their jobs, and unable to get a new one for more than a year, they are unlikely to have the confidence required to spend more of their money than absolutely necessary. However, if they hear that the people who lose their jobs are gaining new ones within a few weeks, they will have much more confidence and will be much more willing to spend.


There are over a million people who have exhausted the 99 weeks of unemployment benefits. These benefits are by no means impressive, and many of the people that collect unemployment actually feel shame about doing so. They would do anything for the financial and spiritual benefits of having a job, but for many there is nothing they can do. If the opportunities arn't out there people can't take advantage of them.


Despite all of the almost non-stop positive spin of the economic situation by economists on major news networks, people know that the economy is not okay. They know that if they lose their job it may be a long time before they get a new one. They know that it would be much easier for their boss to replace them now then any other time over the last few years. People are scared, and they arn't going to spend.


If you ask me its getting ready to really hit the fan. Nothing has been done to address the actual fundamental problems with our economy. We have addressed symptoms of the problems, not the actual problems themselves. Cash for clunkers/appliances wasn't what Keynes was talking about with regards to stimulus spending.

 

[hvactec]

7/21 Bernanke said Today unemployment will go down 1% a year in the United States and in 2012 will be at 7.5% - (their 7.5 is more like 15% or more)

 

[The Rabbi]

7/21 Bernanke said Today unemployment will go down 1% a year in the United States and in 2012 will be at 7.5% - (their 7.5 is more like 15% or more)

Yeah. This is after how many billions have been spent? We would have had 7.5% if they had done absolutely nothing.

 

[topspin]

7/21 Bernanke said Today unemployment will go down 1% a year in the United States and in 2012 will be at 7.5% - (their 7.5 is more like 15% or more)

Yeah. This is after how many billions have been spent? We would have had 7.5% if they had done absolutely nothing.

lol, there is no way to even come close to proving that.

But I was against the redistribution of wealth called HC reform, and the yatch sailers bailout called Tarp.
I'll but that it would have been lower say 3 yrs later letting the economy naturally recover instead of flushing billions down the toilet paying unskilled people to stay home and watch cartoons. No offense stoners.

 

[The Rabbi]

7/21 Bernanke said Today unemployment will go down 1% a year in the United States and in 2012 will be at 7.5% - (their 7.5 is more like 15% or more)

Yeah. This is after how many billions have been spent? We would have had 7.5% if they had done absolutely nothing.

lol, there is no way to even come close to proving that.

But I was against the redistribution of wealth called HC reform, and the yatch sailers bailout called Tarp.
I'll but that it would have been lower say 3 yrs later letting the economy naturally recover instead of flushing billions down the toilet paying unskilled people to stay home and watch cartoons. No offense stoners.

News: 2012 is three years later.

 

[topspin]

Obama was promising 8% with that trillion. There's no way any economist is saying we'd be at 7.5% today.
that said again, I think I agree with your overall point that we'd be much better without it. We may have gotten a lot higher unemployment. But the natural business cycle would have taken care of it. Politicians always want to not accept the cycle. Altering it by inefficient use of capital and paying people to watch cartoons can't be ass good as the free market.

 

[hvactec]

Here I googled it: bernanke said 7.5 % 2012 - Google Search