Increasing Unemployment = Recovery?

Perhaps Obama should concern himself with reducing the costs of hiring American workers, as opposed to pumping additional Chinese $$$ into ever-expanding federal bureaucracies?
 
Last edited:
What do you think caused the private and public debt?

Spending more money than you have. Duhhh.


That's incredibly ignorant. But I'm not surprised at your response.

You clearly don't understand the monetary policies, regulations, laws, and spending programs that drove the debt.
 
Perhaps Obama should concern himself with reducing the costs of hiring American workers, as opposed to pumping additional Chinese $$$ into ever-expanding federal bureaucracies?

I thought that was what illegal immigrants and H1B workers were for?
Whatever the cause it seems to be working.
 
What do you think caused the private and public debt?

Spending more money than you have. Duhhh.


That's incredibly ignorant. But I'm not surprised at your response.

You clearly don't understand the monetary policies, regulations, laws, and spending programs that drove the debt.

OK, maybe he doesn't.

But you don't understand that the tax cuts hardly mattered except in terms of escalating the debt and you don't understand that our financial system absolutely REQUIRES that we generate more debt every single year to keep all the balls in the air.

IOW you don't understand the bizarro econ architecture that monetarism was crafted to serve.
 
Govt spending was the main thing that kept the economy looking better than it deserved under Bush.

Well that and high energy prices.

That and a whole hell of a lot of borrowing off of increasing housing values:

gdp_wo_mew.png
 
Wait ten years and be proven absolutely wrong.

Meanwhile stop claiming as facts that which is not in evidence yet. The unemployment rate is rising.

I didn't say anything about the unemployment rate. If you'll reread my post, you'll see i was talking about a return to sustained job creation.

in 1991, that lag was 12 months.

in 2001, it was 22 months.

in 2009/10, it was 6 months.

I don't have to wait ten years. I've already been proven right.
 
Govt spending was the main thing that kept the economy looking better than it deserved under Bush.

Well that and high energy prices.

That and a whole hell of a lot of borrowing off of increasing housing values:

gdp_wo_mew.png

A few have estimated that as much as 40% of the growth and jobs of the last expansion can be tied either directly or indirectly to the housing bubble, not exactly a strong foundation for the economy.

Truth is, Bush inherited a bad situation after the collapse of the Tech Bubble, so the government and the Fed conducted very loose monetary and fiscal policies which, facilitated by Wall Street, lead to the even bigger and far more problematic Housing Bubble. If we had taken our medicine in the early part of the decade and allowed the collapse of the Tech Bubble to run its course, we probably would not have had a Housing Bubble, or as big of a bubble, and we wouldn't be in as deep of a mess today. That would have meant a deep recession in 2001-03. Bush probably would have won re-election anyways even if he hadn't oversaw extraordinarily loose fiscal policies, which is one reason why this is so tragic.
 

Forum List

Back
Top