Jump to content

Obamanomics


Recommended Posts

Dude, where's my recovery? Megan McArdle: Recovery? What Recovery?

 

Relatedly, it’s undoubtedly true that the weather depressed economic output. But it didn’t depress economic output enough to explain these lackluster figures. If economic growth were actually healthy, it shouldn’t be possible to see numbers this low.

 

No, despite the caveats, the fact remains that we seem to be stuck. Six years after the financial crisis, we still haven’t entered anything that could really be called a “recovery.” A recovery would mean some sort of catch-up growth that reabsorbed stranded workers and capital. Instead, we’re barely limping forward, and the most cheerful thing we can say about any of it is that at least we’re no longer falling back.

 

Even that’s not clear. The numbers are as likely to be revised downward as upward. The truth is, we don’t have a recovery, because we’ve had the systematic imposition of policies — tax increases, redistribution, and especially regulatory uncertainty — that undermine economic growth. But a lot of insiders have gotten rich.

 

 

 

 

 

AN IDEA SO CRAZY IT JUST MIGHT BE WORTH TRYING: Jobs: The best way to fight poverty.

 

 

.

Edited by B-Man
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 1.3k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

 

Nice. A George Bush reference. Such a good little knob-gobbling statist. Keep up the good work but don't forget to wipe your chin when you're done!

 

He best be careful. Wiping his chin is likely a union job.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Get back to us when you get people lining up to dig ditches, redo sewers or clean up parks. Public works jobs. :rolleyes:

 

Yes, but I've got a 5 out of 6 chance to be one of the supervisors standing over the manhole. Uh, the manhole reference had to do with that plate in the street.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

The labor participation rate which is stated as working age people down in the low 60's is awful unless of course you are a politician that relies on the non-working voters. Does anyone know if the 800K leaving the workforce includes retirees? I have not seen that number explained before. If not, that'a horrible number.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Labor participation rate falls sharply in March while unemployment rate shrinks

 

A record 92,594,000 Americans were not in the labor force in April as the labor force participation rate matched a 36-year low of 62.8 percent, according to data released today by the Bureau of Labor Statistics.

 

Over 800,000 dropped out of the workforce last month. I think we're getting closer to Obama's "Mission Accomplished" moment. :lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Over 800,000 dropped out of the workforce last month. I think we're getting closer to Obama's "Mission Accomplished" moment. :lol:

 

And he can also thank the 8-10k baby boomers turning 65 every day.

Edited by Chef Jim
Link to comment
Share on other sites

You guys should LOVE Obama!

 

 

While Democrats are thought to be proponents of "big government," some new data about public sector employment during President Barack Obama's tenure is shedding surprising light on the subject.

 

Public sector jobs -- positions in federal, state and local government -- have declined by 718,000 jobs since Obama took office, according to the economics blog Calculated Risk.

 

Under his Republican predecessor, President George W. Bush, the number of public sector jobs swelled by 1.75 million, the blog found.

 

There's a big caveat with the findings, though. Most of the public sector jobs lost during Obama's tenure are due to cutbacks at the state and local level, the study notes.While reductions in federal spending might have affected state and local employment, the decisions to reduce headcount would have been made at those local levels.

 

http://money.msn.com/now/post.aspx?post=a4602806-9a56-4980-91fd-71334748a79b

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...