Double Dip Recession looming

[Trakar]

Evidence? ... specifically in this case.

"propensities" do not always so easily reveal themselves in every specific case, which is precisely why it is characterized as a "propensity."

Given this, the source you cite, notes a counter-argument in the context of the carefully clipped quip:

"...The White House countered that companies are wary of hiring not because of new regulations but because they're still waiting for consumer demand to return. The administration also claimed credit for 3.5 million jobs created by the stimulus bill from last year..."

the point being, you are entitled to your opinion, but when you begin conflating these for facts, you are no longer a reliable or accurate source of anything but rhetorical, echo-chamber functionality.

personally, I trend toward supporting general Washington's considerations with regards to the dangers associated with political parties in American politics:

“...It serves always to distract the public councils, and enfeeble the public administration. It agitates the community with ill-founded jealousies and false alarms, kindles the animosity of one part against another, foments occasionally riot and insurrection. It opens the door to foreign influence and corruption, which find a facilitated access to the government itself through the channels of party passions. Thus the policy and will of one country, are subjected to the policy and will of another...”

I've nothing against politics, it is when it becomes institutional as opposed to individual that the abominations arise.

 

[Tero]

I think we are seeing the first rumblings of problems politics cant fix. It just redistributes resources, does not add them.

 

[Bob Blaylock]

If Republicans successfully sell the idea that their bad policy ideas actually worked, they may end up trying them much earlier in the next crisis at which point it really could be catastrophic for the US economy.

…in other words…

Ladies and gentlemen, either you are closing your eyes to a situation you do not wish to acknowledge, or you are not aware of the caliber of disaster indicated by the presence of a pool table in your community!​

Fortunately, an increasing portion of the American population is beginning to see past the current pack of lies that hold that the only way to save us from a terrible financial catastrophe is for government to keep squandering more and more and more taxpayer money on increasingly worthless, wasteful, and even destructive scams such as the current administration has been selling us.

 

[Trakar]

(...) Fortunately, an increasing portion of the American population is beginning to see past the current pack of lies that hold that the only way to save us from a terrible financial catastrophe is for government to keep squandering more and more and more taxpayer money on increasingly worthless, wasteful, and even destructive scams such as the current administration has been selling us.

can you cite examples?

From what I can tell there is no more accurate discernment in any significant fraction of the American population than there has ever been. They seem as fickle and generally ignorant as ever, merely ready to swap to a new set of lies and misguided confusions. The really sad part is that, for the most part, the same people are making money off of the lies regardless of which party or politics comes to power.

 

[BeAChooser]

The administration also claimed credit for 3.5 million jobs created by the stimulus bill from last year..."

LOL! Let me ask you some simple questions, TS.

On what basis did the administration make that claim of jobs created (actually, it was jobs created AND SAVED)? Because the CBO concluded that? And do you believe the CBO? Afterall, the former head of the CBO said this:

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/08/25/stimulus-figures-questioned-amid-economic-team-firings/

Aug 25, 2010

… snip …

But Douglas Holtz-Eakin, former CBO director, said the CBO analysis cannot be taken "at face value."

The CBO report not only gives a wide range for stimulus impact in the second quarter of 2010 -- saying between 1.4 million and 3.3 million jobs were created or saved and economic growth was somewhere between 1.7 percent and 4.5 percent -- the models used are designed to spit out positive figures, he said.

"This is repackaging previous analysis at the request of Democrats in Congress," he told Fox News. "This is based on a computer model, and with computer models you get out what you put in, and the kinds of models that the CBO uses is one where the stimulus can't fail to work."

Did you get that?

"the models used are designed to spit out positive figures"

"the kinds of models that the CBO uses is one where the stimulus can't fail to work."

The model spit out x number million jobs created and saved because of the assumptions that are put into the model. Assumptions given to them by the Whitehouse. And there is no real check on the model. In fact, Elmendorf was asked "If the stimulus bill did not do what it was originally forecast to do, then that would not have been detected by the subsequent [CBO] analysis, right?" Elmendorf's response? "That's right. That's right."

They could just as easily have concluded 6 million jobs were going to be created and saved and you'd be here claiming that's how many were created and saved. But it's a case of garbage in and garbage out with absolutely no way to test the veracity of the model or the results.

Other than the fact that the model told them unemployment would only rise to 8% with the Stimulus and it's now over 10%.

The reality that none of you on the left will face is that right now we’re down over 8 million jobs from what Obama promised, the economy has slowed enough to look like a double dip may happen, and growth estimates for years into the future are anemic at best.

 

[Trakar]

LOL! Let me ask you some simple questions, TS.

On what basis did the administration make that claim of jobs created (actually, it was jobs created AND SAVED)? Because the CBO concluded that? And do you believe the CBO? Afterall, the former head of the CBO said this:

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/08/25/stimulus-figures-questioned-amid-economic-team-firings/

I didn't claim the administration's assertions were any more accurate or reliable than the Chamber of Commerce's political rhetoric, in fact, the intended inference was that they were opposing political distortions of a much more complicated and involved underlying reality, if the nuance of the exchanges are difficult for you to follow let me know and I start including some bluntly explicit sub-text to help you follow along (ie., "you aren't stupid, but you aren't paying sufficient attention to the details of what is actually being said."). Anything I can do to help others to understand, clearly and unambiguously, what I am actually saying is never a bother or problem. Please do not hesitate to ask when you are unsure about any of my comments, it will go far to avoiding little embarassments like this for you in the future.

(BTW, attempting to use one over-the-top rhetorical echo-chamber source to support another over-the-top rhetorical source's statements from within the same echo-chamber is not only poor form, but verging on circular reasoning and intellectual disingenuity - not that I really care to address such as they are the content of an irrelevent response to an apparently misunderstood post.)

 

[BeAChooser]

Like I said, TShaitanaku, the reality is that none of you on the left will face the fact that right now we’re down over 8 million jobs from what Obama promised (and even more if you look at jobs lost since democrats took control of both houses of Congress), the economy has slowed enough to look like a double dip (or even depression) may happen, and growth estimates for years into the future are anemic at best. And not even sub-text seems to help you folks understand any of that.

 

[Trakar]

Like I said, TShaitanaku, the reality is that none of you on the left will face the fact that right now we’re down over 8 million jobs from what Obama promised (and even more if you look at jobs lost since democrats took control of both houses of Congress), the economy has slowed enough to look like a double dip (or even depression) may happen, and growth estimates for years into the future are anemic at best. And not even sub-text seems to help you folks understand any of that.

"left" and "right" qualifications are merely further distortions of complex realities designed to accomodate largely unreasoned partisan perspectives rather than accurately defining and logically addressing the actual issues of importance in our nation. [IOW - there you go again!]

 

[Beth]

Actions have consequences. In the case of the GOP, it hardly takes telepathy to discern their planned actions if they should win big in the upcoming election -- it's in the platform, after all.

I'm sorry, but as near as I can tell any relationship between the party platform and what actions are taken is tangential at best. Politicians do not do what they say they will. For example, the Republicans say they are for small government, but increase it's size instead. They may say they are for massive spending cuts, but I wouldn't expect them to actually make such cuts.

From what I can tell there is no more accurate discernment in any significant fraction of the American population than there has ever been. They seem as fickle and generally ignorant as ever, merely ready to swap to a new set of lies and misguided confusions. The really sad part is that, for the most part, the same people are making money off of the lies regardless of which party or politics comes to power.

I'm sad to say that I agree with this.

 

[Just thinking]

"propensities" do not always so easily reveal themselves in every specific case, which is precisely why it is characterized as a "propensity."

I see ... no direct evidence.

Given this, the source you cite, notes a counter-argument in the context of the carefully clipped quip:

"...The White House countered that companies are wary of hiring not because of new regulations but because they're still waiting for consumer demand to return. The administration also claimed credit for 3.5 million jobs created by the stimulus bill from last year..."

A second source does not invalidate anything ... it merely gives another reason. I already have mentioned that a plurality of situations is keeping the economy and hiring at not-so-great levels. Also, has it ever occurred to you that consumer demand is down for a variety of reasons ... one being that the future of government taxes/regulations/fees may be significantly rising soon? Also, just how can 3.5 million jobs have been created when the BLS doesn't even show that many net jobs created in the last 18 months?

the point being, you are entitled to your opinion, but when you begin conflating these for facts, you are no longer a reliable or accurate source of anything but rhetorical, echo-chamber functionality.

And that evidence is still lacking.

 

[daenku32]

Also, just how can 3.5 million jobs have been created when the BLS doesn't even show that many net jobs created in the last 18 months?

Since the private markets have continued to lay lots of people in the 18 months, doesn't that leave a lot of room when looking at the net figured? Perhaps you meant gross jobs created?

This doesn't prove the 3.5 million number, but it counters the claim that the net figures positively show the number to be false.

 

[Just thinking]

No ... definitely not gross. That's almost meaningless because one cannot know just how many hires are the result of retirements, firings, deaths, people quitting for whatever reason, etc. etc. Unless you can supply us with truly new jobs that wouldn't exist without the stimulus that are equal to or equivalent in production to jobs before the recession (e.g.; non-temporary, equal paying, long term, etc.), the net number will have to do as the best indicator of increased job growth.