Toro
Diamond Member
We haven't bottomed in the economy though the fourth quarter probably will be the worst. Unemployment is going into double digits so for most people, the worst has just begun.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
I had to check because your post doesn't make sense to me, you seem to be saying the numbers are bigger because the population has grown therefore it is not as bad as in the past when the numbers were smaller
Yes, that is a correct reading and somewhat obvious. Let's say at the end of WWII you 145 million people in the US and 550,000 lost their job in one month that would be .3% of the total population. Since we've doubled in population, that percentage would be halved.
So, is it less bad to have .15% lose a job than .3%? I would say so.
Understood...We seem to agree that it hasn't bottomed out yet and is likely to take some time before it get any better, I am not going to argue about a matter of months.
Understood...
I was only suggesting 6 more months on the downside.
And likely agreeing years, because of Obama's likely actions.
Unless of course it isn't Obama making the decisions by then.
The SCOTUS still needs to Hear some Cases on his eligibility, and if you ask me, the man is not Constitutionally eligible to be President, so we could be looking at President Biden.
Then you agree it is a recession but it is not as bad as others you remember yet but it may become so?
It's not hard to get to a raw number that is as large as something 60 years ago...
If it isn't so hard, why did it take 60 years to do it?
Therefore the only real opportunities for massive job loss were during the two major recessions 1974 and 1982.
I had to check because your post doesn't make sense to me, you seem to be saying the numbers are bigger because the population has grown therefore it is not as bad as in the past when the numbers were smaller
What Tech said was that with a larger population, even a small percentage will surpass the numbers from 1945 when the percentage drop was higher. With a working population of over 150 million today, a one percent increase in the unemployment rate would equate to 1.5 million lost jobs. In 1945, with half the population, it would have taken a two percent increase in umenployment to equal that many lost jobs. It's just basic arithmetic.
Understood...
I was only suggesting 6 more months on the downside.
And likely agreeing years, because of Obama's likely actions.
Unless of course it isn't Obama making the decisions by then.
The SCOTUS still needs to Hear some Cases on his eligibility, and if you ask me, the man is not Constitutionally eligible to be President, so we could be looking at President Biden.
http://www.usmessageboard.com/polit...onstitutionally-eligible-to-be-president.htmlI love the mentality of some of you who still believe Obama is not a US citizen. Here is the problem with your argument; you have no proof. Because Obama does have a legitimate birth certificate from Hawaii, in order to prove him ineligible, someone needs to show us proof that he wasn't born in the US. In other words, show us a certificate of birth from Kenya. If no one can come up with that as evidence, then there is no case to be made, nor is there a case to even be heard in court; and that is why the courts have refused to hear any suits brought against Obama concerning this matter.
So you know, I myself have some questions concerning the place of Obama's birth, but the fact is there is no evidence that should lead us to believe that he was not born in the US.
The SCOTUS still needs to Hear some Cases on his eligibility, and if you ask me, the man is not Constitutionally eligible to be President, so we could be looking at President Biden.
Yes, that is a correct reading and somewhat obvious. Let's say at the end of WWII you 145 million people in the US and 550,000 lost their job in one month that would be .3% of the total population. Since we've doubled in population, that percentage would be halved.
So, is it less bad to have .15% lose a job than .3%? I would say so.
As much as so many people hate Bush and blame him for everything, Obama is continuing the policies Bush put into motion to try to turn things around. ..
.What so many people, especially Democrats, don't realize, is that Bush was much the moderate when it came to the economy. Other than his tax cuts, his ideas aren't much different from those of Obama.
And we lost OVER 2 Million last year...This is true.
On a comparative basis, the jobs losses in 1945 would be equivalent to nearly 2 million today.
Check here.
Bespoke Investment Group: 41st Worst Monthly Jobs Report On Record...Yes 41st
Okay, this is becoming a universal meme among former bush voters. 3 months ago, every single conservative and bush supporter said obama was either a radical muslim, a marxist, or at best a dangerous extremist liberal from the extreme far left of the dem party.
So let me ask, were bush voters lying three months ago?