Shades of DEPRESSION? Decline in economy in US and world wide

[editec]

The US workforce shrank by 652,000 in June, one of the sharpest contractions ever. The rate of hourly earnings fell 0.1pc. Wages are flirting with deflation.

"Home sales are down. Retail sales are down. Factory orders in May suffered their biggest tumble since March of last year.

California is tightening faster than Greece. State workers have seen a 14pc fall in earnings this year due to forced furloughs. Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger is cutting pay for 200,000 state workers to the minimum wage of $7.25 an hour to cover his $19bn (£15bn) deficit.

Illinois be far behind? The state has a deficit of $12bn and is $5bn in arrears to schools, nursing homes, child care centres, and prisons. "It is getting worse every single day," said state comptroller Daniel Hynes. "We are not paying bills for absolutely essential services.

Roughly a million Americans have dropped out of the jobs market altogether over the past two months.

The share of the US working-age population with jobs in June actually fell from 58.7pc to 58.5pc. The ratio was 63pc three years ago. Eight million jobs have been lost.

The average time needed to find a job has risen to a record 35.2 weeks...this compares with a peak of 21.2 weeks in the Volcker recession of the early 1980s.

...the crop of people who are unemployed but not receiving a check amounts to 9.2m."

The housing market is already crumbling as government props are pulled away. The expiry of homebuyers' tax credit led to a 30pc fall in the number of buyers signing contracts in May

China's manufacturing index has been falling since January, with a downward lurch in June to 50.4, just above the break-even line of 50.

Momentum seems to be flagging everywhere, whether in Australian building permits, Turkish exports, or Japanese industrial output.

Are you getting it YET, partisans?

This isn't a democratic recession, this isn't a republican downturn in the economy, this is what comes of nearly 50 years of corrupt mismanagement and internacine bickering and squabbling by the American people while the SUPERWEALTHY gave themselves so many damned advantages that they wrecked the WORLD'S ECONOMY.

So you just keep bithcing like ignoramouses about Obama and RACE and how much you hate ARABS or Jews while you nation and the rest of the world crumble thanks to the STUPID FUCKING POLICIES both your god damned parties put into place.

Guess what?

Your votes, the ones that you pissed away on issues like guns and race, and homos or Blacks or Isreal, or some otherfeel good cause I hate, bullshit, flagwaving freking nonsense that so many of you care so much about were all just wasted votes.

It's about the economy, STUPID!

Always was, and it always will be!

No matter what the talking heads dangle in front of you to keep you distracted from the REAL issues.​

Make of note of it.

Thank you for allowing me to publically freak out.

I now return you to the petty nonsense that most of you care so much about.

 

[sparky]

the wealthy have so many tools of diversion though, the entire game is usry extended into every life here, even the unborn, all fueling a disparity akin to the guilded age

but when the media and government are in their back pockets, they never assume a target

more JP Morgans famous quote being revived among us now, one American always willing to turn his/her back on another American here

they don't know the dif bettween a hand up and a hand out, equating it all to an evil socialistic plot

ironically, while the uber wealthy are granted just that.....

~S~

 

[topspin]

deppression is like 25% ish unemployment, we are several major dissasters away from that.
In fact the economy is growing, facts seemed to get ignored in all doom and gloom senerios

 

[editec]

deppression is like 25% ish unemployment, we are several major dissasters away from that.
In fact the economy is growing, facts seemed to get ignored in all doom and gloom senerios

We already have more than 25% unemployment.

Americans are so deperately UNDEREMPLOYED that comparisons to the employment patterns of 80 years ago are misleading and essentially meaningless.

When the GREAT DEPRESSION hit, women did NOT work.(that the percentage who lost their jobs was very different than the percentage being counted today )

Before the great depression few of them HAD TO WORK.

Most of the people not working are not really counted.

The millions of small businessmen who are sitting idle, for example, are not unemployed.

They just don't have ANY WORK!

The millions working part time at jobs FAR below their euducation and skills sets are NOT working anywhere near their capacity.

Stop relying on a load on nonsense numbers and start looking around at the world you live in, not the nonsense world of labor statisticians.

Those are the same damned EXPERTS who were telling us that things were A-okay while the middle class was going broke for the last two freaking decades.

 

[topspin]

that's comical thanks, we will see 3% GDP growth. I'd love to see your post if it were true that GDP was falling 10% and unemployment was 25%.

 

[Yukon.]

I live in Canada and we're doing just fine. If you don't believe me just ask our Conservative Prime Minister Stephen Harper - he'd never lie !

 

[sparky]

that's comical thanks, we will see 3% GDP growth. I'd love to see your post if it were true that GDP was falling 10% and unemployment was 25%.

there are lies, da*ned lies, and statistics Tspin

when we finally strip off that venere of BS the elites feed us, we find that indeed the GDP is growing, all at that top 1%

The millions of small businessmen who are sitting idle, for example, are not unemployed.

They just don't have ANY WORK!

and one can only shake so many hands, and kiss so many babies Editec

~S~

 

[editec]

that's comical thanks, we will see 3% GDP growth. I'd love to see your post if it were true that GDP was falling 10% and unemployment was 25%.

Hope you're right.

 

[topspin]

Sparky being elite is easy.

 

[Yukon.]

The US is owned outright by China. Soon you'll all be studying Mao's "Little Red Book". Oh how the mighty have fallen.

 

[sparky]

Sparky being elite is easy.

how so?

Posted on Jul 24, 2009

Flickr / jonrawlinson

By David Sirota

Here’s a truism: The wealthiest 1 percent have never had it so good.

According to government figures, 1-percenters’ share of America’s total income is the highest it’s been since 1929, and their tax rates are the lowest they’ve faced in two decades. Through bonuses, many 1-percenters will profit from the $23 trillion in bailout largesse the Treasury Department now says could be headed to financial firms. And, most of them benefit from IRS decisions to reduce millionaire audits and collect zero taxes from the majority of major corporations.

But what really makes the ultrawealthy so fortunate, what truly separates this moment from a run-of-the-mill Gilded Age, is the unprecedented protection the 1-percenters have bought for themselves on the most pressing issues.

To review: With 22,000 Americans dying each year because they lack health insurance, Congress is considering universal health care legislation financed by a surcharge on income above $280,000—that is, a levy almost exclusively on 1-percenters. This surtax would graze just 5 percent of small businesses and would recoup only part of the $700 billion the 1-percenters received from the Bush tax cuts. In fact, it is so minuscule, those making $1 million annually would pay just $9,000 more in taxes every year—or nine-tenths of 1 percent of their 12-month haul.

Nonetheless, the 1-percenters have deployed an army to destroy the initiative before it makes progress.



David Sirota: The Attack of the 1-Percenters - Truthdig

~S~

 

[Yukon.]

Is Mandarin one of the official lnaguages in the USA? Your Negro President will soon have your children learning it in school. Your children will slaute Martin Luthor King daily prior to reciting the oath of allegiance, and you will pay the Negros of America reparations for slavery. The USA the wolrd admired when I was a boy is gone and will never retrun. Sad but true. The men who died saving her from the Germans did so in vain. How sad.

God bless Canada for we are free.

 

[sparky]

oh i dunno Yukon....i just think they didn't get 'em all......

~S~

 

[Yukon.]

Sparky,

I see you're using images that promote the former administration of G. Bush, Junior. How quaint.

 

[Neubarth]

deppression is like 25% ish unemployment, we are several major dissasters away from that.
In fact the economy is growing, facts seemed to get ignored in all doom and gloom senerios

We already have more than 25% unemployment.

Americans are so deperately UNDEREMPLOYED that comparisons to the employment patterns of 80 years ago are misleading and essentially meaningless.

When the GREAT DEPRESSION hit, women did NOT work.(that the percentage who lost their jobs was very different than the percentage being counted today )

Before the great depression few of them HAD TO WORK.

Most of the people not working are not really counted.

The millions of small businessmen who are sitting idle, for example, are not unemployed.

They just don't have ANY WORK!

The millions working part time at jobs FAR below their euducation and skills sets are NOT working anywhere near their capacity.

Stop relying on a load on nonsense numbers and start looking around at the world you live in, not the nonsense world of labor statisticians.

Those are the same damned EXPERTS who were telling us that things were A-okay while the middle class was going broke for the last two freaking decades.

Thanks for confirming what I have been saying for the past year. It is good to have some highly intelligent people on this board. Now, if only we could get the moderators in line.

 

[pinqy]

We already have more than 25% unemployment.

If you switch yardsticks. But to put current UE at above 25% would put Great Depression UE at above 50%.

Americans are so deperately UNDEREMPLOYED that comparisons to the employment patterns of 80 years ago are misleading and essentially meaningless.

Only if the Underemployment (a term that has never been quantitatively defined) is radically different from the Great Depression. I have not seen any evidence to support that, and I doubt you have either.

When the GREAT DEPRESSION hit, women did NOT work.(that the percentage who lost their jobs was very different than the percentage being counted today )

True, but irrelevant.

Before the great depression few of them HAD TO WORK.

Few of them were ALLOWED to work. Career choices were extremely limited and there was a strong social stigma against it. Cost of living was a lot lower then as well. Very few people nowadays would be content to live as they did in the 1920's: no car, no telephone, no indoor plumbing for many, no television, no radio for many, no computers, no air conditioning etc. They didn't have as much stuff to buy.

Most of the people not working are not really counted.

They're counted, they're just not classified as unemployed. Most of the people not working don't want to work (because they say they don't want to work). Of the adult civilian non-institutional population (I assume even you wouldn't want to include prisoners or mental patients or children) not included int the labor force, only 7.8% say they want a job. Of that 7.8%, only 40% (3% of all non-workers) were available to work and had looked sometime in the last year (Marginally Attached to the Labor Force). And of that 40%, only 46.6% (18.7% of those who said they wanted to work, 1.5% of all non-workers) said it was due to economic reasons.

The millions of small businessmen who are sitting idle, for example, are not unemployed.

They might be. If they did no work for pay during the reference week, and had looked for work, then they would be unemployed. So a contractor or small business owner who did no work at all, but was trying to find clients, would indeed be classified as unemployed.

The millions working part time at jobs FAR below their euducation and skills sets are NOT working anywhere near their capacity.

They're not unemployed if they have a job. Underemployment is too tricky to define. How do you OBJECTIVELY determine is someone is working below their education and/or skill set? I'm sure there are many fry-clerks at McDonalds who think they could be CEO of a Fortune 500 company, but how accurate is that assessment? Or another extreme case: a person with a Masters degree and plenty of work experience who just spent time in jail for possession of cocaine. It's not economic factors that would put him/her in a minimum wage job. And is someone with a degree in Drama who is working in a restaurant underemployed or not?

You're not talking about those people, but how do you seperate them out from the ones you are talking about? How do you measure them in any meaningful way? You can't.

Stop relying on a load on nonsense numbers and start looking around at the world you live in, not the nonsense world of labor statisticians.

So you're seriously claiming that anecdotal evidence and observations of a limited area, with no clear definitions and no methodology at all are more accurate for a nationwide picture than actual statistical methods? That's ridiculous. Walking down the street where you are only gives you the picture of where you are, not places completely different demographically, with different industries, on the other side of the country.

Just because you're not trained in statistical analysis, and just because you don't understand how the numbers are derived and what they really mean, does not mean they're nonsense.

 

[Neubarth]

So you're seriously claiming that anecdotal evidence and observations of a limited area, with no clear definitions and no methodology at all are more accurate for a nationwide picture than actual statistical methods? That's ridiculous. Walking down the street where you are only gives you the picture of where you are, not places completely different demographically, with different industries, on the other side of the country.

Just because you're not trained in statistical analysis, and just because you don't understand how the numbers are derived and what they really mean, does not mean they're nonsense.

Still arguing the same crazy shit with people who know more than you do about what is going on? Pinky you are not going to convince people who know the truth that your insane lies are believable. As I told you before, gain access to the University of California data or that of Stanford University. In both cases you will see that the actual unemployment numbers are in excess of 30 Million people. And, yes, we are in a Depression.

You can lie about it all that you want, and you can tell people that they should really believe the totally false government estimates, but those who have seen the evidence first hand will not be deluded.

 

[eric1]

They can talk about a "recovery" all they want, but until there is significant job creation, which STILL 1 1/2 years into this administration is NOT a priority, there isn't going to be any SIGNIFICANT recovery.

 

[Big Fitz]

About the OP:

Well dip me in beer and throw me to drunk chicks! Ed's getting a buncha points right. I just may have to posrep him. Da hells the world coming to?

 

[sparky]

Well dip me in beer and throw me to drunk chicks!

I'm in....

Ed's getting a buncha points right. I just may have to posrep him.

Editec's possibly the internet's most unsung casandra

Da hells the world coming to?

us getting on each other sh*t over crumbs from the table of the powers that be

~S~