The U.S. Economy: Stand by for more worse news

[Billy T]

Today the 10 year Treasury bond yield climbed above 2% (as I write it is 1.99%) and CPI is ~1.75% so 10 year bonds are now paying a modest but real rate of return. Investors have more faith in Germany´s 10 year bonds as they only need to pay 1.70% when selling them. I´m not sure what the German "CPI" is but don´t think the Germany bonds have a positive real rate of return. - I.e. they are sold as safe store of wealth, as US bonds were until last few weeks, with small, built-in, loss of purchasing power.

In post within last month when Treasury interest rates had already risen 32% from the low of 23 April12 to 1.84% I predicted that US treasury interest rates would continue their rise (despite Ben Bernanke´s efforts) to 2% by end of 2013 before inflation did. - That rapid rise in cost of carrying the debt (with new issues) is more rapid than I expected.

Perhaps as I speculated a month or so ago we are in the very early stages of the collapse of the dollar? Fed now buys 85% of treasury issue and life insurance companies (which don´t care about the value of the dollar as their policies require payment of fixed amount) are buying about 5% of the new issues. China became a net seller of Treasury paper more than two years ago, but in months when US trade deficit is large may briefly experience slight brief increase in its holding of US Treasuries. Almost all central banks are selling dollars to buy gold now. Germany wants its gold (2nd largest holder) back on German soil now - does not trust being in USA now? If other large holders follow Germany´s lead, we will soon see if US has all the gold it claims or if Ron Paul had grounds for his fears it did not.

If you can not see where this all is leading there is no hope for you protecting yourself from dollar´s decreasing purchasing power. I warned you what was coming 6 years ago and still see no reason to change my prediction of a run on the dollar on or before Halloween 2014.

 

[Michael]

Imagine how much it would have cost the US tax payer to nationalize our banks.

Joe, it's been nearly 6 years since this started. Our economy is in a shambles, American University students are coming out of University with tens of thousands of dollars of debt and there are no job. Contrary to your belief the economy is doing well, it's not doing well. It's to the point where many young Americans who should be out starting families are still living at home with their parents. It's to the point now where people are no longer having children. Does THAT sound like a good economy to you?

You may think unemployment is 8% but in the real world it's above 15%. And if you took away all the part-time low paid McJobs it's above 25%. Inflation is running at 5%.


AND you want to talk about "Nationalizing the Banks". Get this Joe, when banks go bust, people lose their accounts. The CEOs sell everything and go into the poor house. That's the way it works. It works like that so that we can prevent things like this from happening. Which is why people can buy Bank Insurance. BUT, thanks to an apathetic dumbed down public we now have "The Government" guaranteeing everyone's bank account (or to put it another way: We now have a group of un-elected un-productive humans with the legal authority to point at gun at the middle class's head and squeeze them and their children of their labor - you know, "For the Common Good").


Economist have already answered your question Joe. AND yes, it comes in at around $4 Trillion dollars to have secured every single bank account deposit in the USA while the government nationalized and sold off all of the TBTF banks. THAT would have sucked. It also would have been over 5 years ago. Sure, there'd be no names on WallStreet like GoldmanSux or Bank of America. Those institutions and their directors and share holders would have gone bust. Instead we're now $16 Trillion dollars in debt. MORE than we can ever hope to repay. Any of this making any sense to you Joe? Once it was over it'd be over.

How many more years Joe before you realize Central Planning does not work. It never worked and it never will work. Bernanke is one person who lived in an Ivory Tower bubble. He has absolutely no idea how to fix the economy and the more he does try to 'fix' it, the worse it's going to get. Which, if you cared to look out your palace window you'd see as it's patently obvious.



You say I'd support "Nationalizing" the banks. Well, Joe. YES, in this sad state of affairs with our totally screwed up Fascist economy, that is what would have to happen temporarily - just like in Iceland. BUT, it's certainly not would SHOULD be happening. If we were to return to the Free Market with competing banks that were NOT Too Big To Fail and competing currency and a properly functioning system of insurance and rating agencies it wouldn't happen. We're actually going in the opposite direction. We're becoming more and more Fascist. That's only going to last so long. There will come an end to this charade.



So, again, how many more years will it take Joe? Five more? Ten more? How many generations are you willing to sacrifice so your heroes on WallStreet, the top 1% that was and continues to be bailed out, can keep living the good life?

 

[joepistole]

Joe, it's been nearly 6 years since this started. Our economy is in a shambles, American University students are coming out of University with tens of thousands of dollars of debt and there are no job. Contrary to your belief the economy is doing well, it's not doing well. It's to the point where many young Americans who should be out starting families are still living at home with their parents. It's to the point now where people are no longer having children. Does THAT sound like a good economy to you?

The reality is that new college grads can and are getting jobs. The unemployment rate for new college graduates has fallen signficantly and consistently since the unemployment peak in 2009. If fact, the unemployment rate for new college graduates is lower than the national unemployment rate.

http://naceweb.org/s10102012/job-market-new-graduates/

You may think unemployment is 8% but in the real world it's above 15%. And if you took away all the part-time low paid McJobs it's above 25%. Inflation is running at 5%.

It is a matter of fact that the unemployment rate is under 8%. The only way you can get an unemployment rate of greater than 8% is if you count employed people as unemployed. But then you are no longer measuring unemployed people. You know this; we have had this discussion umpteen times before. But it doesn’t stop you from trying to demagogue the unemployment number.

And only in your dreams is the inflation rate running at 5%, in the real world inflation in the US has been running at about 2% per year for the last 3 years. Four years ago we had negative inflation….it is called a depression or recession. Gasoline prices went from over $4/gallon too less than $2/gallon in a matter of months.

AND you want to talk about "Nationalizing the Banks". Get this Joe, when banks go bust, people lose their accounts. The CEOs sell everything and go into the poor house. That's the way it works. It works like that so that we can prevent things like this from happening. Which is why people can buy Bank Insurance. BUT, thanks to an apathetic dumbed down public we now have "The Government" guaranteeing everyone's bank account (or to put it another way: We now have a group of un-elected un-productive humans with the legal authority to point at gun at the middle class's head and squeeze them and their children of their labor - you know, "For the Common Good").

No, I don’t want to talk about nationalizing banks. You brought up the topic when you held Iceland up as the model for handling the recent economic crisis. And no, when banks go belly up, most depositors don’t lose their money because the government ensures their deposits up to 100k in the US (before the crisis). So nationalizing the banks would have put the US government on the hook for all those deposits and the resulting loses and the US government would still be running the majority of banks in this country.

You like to scream about government taxation as acts of violence, but then you have no qualms about endorsing a forced takeover of private assets (e.g. nationalization of banks). You don’t see the hypocrisy?

Economist have already answered your question Joe. AND yes, it comes in at around $4 Trillion dollars to have secured every single bank account deposit in the USA while the government nationalized and sold off all of the TBTF banks. THAT would have sucked. It also would have been over 5 years ago. Sure, there'd be no names on WallStreet like GoldmanSux or Bank of America. Those institutions and their directors and share holders would have gone bust. Instead we're now $16 Trillion dollars in debt. MORE than we can ever hope to repay. Any of this making any sense to you Joe? Once it was over it'd be over.

I didn’t ask any questions. I said imagine how expensive it would have been had the US government did as you want, nationalize the banking industry. Instead of putting money into public coffers as the bailouts did, it would have been a huge drain on public coffers. And who would buy these banks you want to nationalize? That was kind of the problem, investors didn’t want to invest. There was too much risk in the economy. So the fact is, there were no buyers. If there were buyers, the banks would not have needed the bailout money from the federal government. They could have gone to Wall Street for the money, like they normally do. And it wouldn’t have been over in a year or two or even three years. It would have been a long drawn out and expensive process. This is a particularly odd argument coming for a devout Libertarian like you, believing that government can never do anything better than private enterprise. All of a sudden you want the government to step in and run the banks. And the directors and executives would not have gone bust as you are claiming under your scheme of nationalization. They would all walk away with their wealth intact, because they are protected by insurance and the corporate shield. And the government would have to find someone to run their banks in their absence. And it wouldn’t be as neat and as quick as you seem to think. But it is clear that it instead of putting money into public coffers it would have taken significant sums of money out of public coffers.

How many more years Joe before you realize Central Planning does not work. It never worked and it never will work. Bernanke is one person who lived in an Ivory Tower bubble. He has absolutely no idea how to fix the economy and the more he does try to 'fix' it, the worse it's going to get. Which, if you cared to look out your palace window you'd see as it's patently obvious.

One small problem, we don’t have a planned economy, and our economy works. It has produced the wealthiest, most powerful and one of the most prosperous nations in the world. The one problem you have here Michael is your claims just don’t line up with the facts, with reality. The US economy has been consistently growing for 3 years now, and it has done much better than your idealized Iceland.

You say I'd support "Nationalizing" the banks. Well, Joe. YES, in this sad state of affairs with our totally screwed up Fascist economy, that is what would have to happen temporarily - just like in Iceland. BUT, it's certainly not would SHOULD be happening. If we were to return to the Free Market with competing banks that were NOT Too Big To Fail and competing currency and a properly functioning system of insurance and rating agencies it wouldn't happen. We're actually going in the opposite direction. We're becoming more and more Fascist. That's only going to last so long. There will come an end to this charade.

Nice attempt at more demagoguery Michael, but the economy is in pretty good shape. We have come a long way in the last 4 years. GDP has never been higher, the stock markets are hitting new highs almost daily, unemployment rate is almost at full employment and more jobs are added to the economy with each passing month. We do have free markets, and we do have a currency that is freely traded on the markets each business day around the globe - facts you like to repeatedly ignore. And there has been significant banking reform, so the “Too big to fail” condition no longer exists.

So, again, how many more years will it take Joe? Five more? Ten more? How many generations are you willing to sacrifice so your heroes on WallStreet, the top 1% that was and continues to be bailed out, can keep living the good life?

Unfortunately for you Michael, most Americans are doing just fine. Unfortunately for you the bailouts, per my previous post, have been paid back and the US government has made money off its bailout investments. The bottom line here is if the US had used your recommendations and gone down the path taken by Iceland, the recession would have been at least 3 to 4 times more severe and lasted more than twice as long and the US would be much more in debt. Because that is what the “Iceland Solution” which you have advocated for did for Iceland.

 

[Billy T]

The reality is that new college grads can and are getting jobs. The unemployment rate for new college graduates has fallen signficantly and consistently since the unemployment peak in 2009. If fact, the unemployment rate for new college graduates is lower than the national unemployment rate. http://naceweb.org/s10102012/job-market-new-graduates/

That is good news, but I wonder what fraction of the jobs they are taking required a college education? No doubt, even for job at grocery check-out or McDonalds, the applicant with college degrees gets preference of over one without. Thus, to some extent, college grads are taking the jobs that once went to high school grads. What would be more interesting is the unemployment rate by age groups. I think there has been little, if any improvement in that. Perhaps you or someone will search and check my guess?

It is a matter of fact that the unemployment rate is under 8%. The only way you can get an unemployment rate of greater than 8% is if you count employed people as unemployed. ...

No. All you need to do to get above 8% is to count those who looked for work for several months and then realized they were wasting time and money so they ceased looking. (Some have become "self-employed" in various crimes as I describe at the end of this post.)

I think the "labor force participation" rate gives a more realistic picture of the job market. - As I recall it has never been as low as it is now. In some recent months both the number of new jobs created and the official unemployment rate have dropped as those ceasing to look for work more than compensated for the decreasing rate of job creation. Here is graph:

I.e. more young potential workers are entering the labor force than jobs are being created for them and even the unusually high rate of older workers leaving (>10,000 per day baby boomers retiring) can not compensate - make the participation rate rise.

The simple truth is that the economy is so bad that it is producing jobs at a much lower rate than required for all to find work.
In part this is the fault of the education system - there are plenty of jobs for designers of robots, which make less workers needed. See quote of DoD at end.

You can also see the steady multi-year decline in the labor force participation rate here: http://ycharts.com/indicators/labor...l&recessions=false&zoom=5&startDate=&endDate=
but it will not copy to post. (Data given there is the same, but without the obvious "anti-Obama" display tricks.)

Countries like China and Russia are well ahead of the U.S. in terms of having cyber forces of the kind that the Pentagon is trying to build up, said Alan Paller, director of research at the SANS Institute. The challenge for the DoD will be to find enough qualified cybersecurity professionals to meet its ambitious expansion plans, he said.

"The key to putting the 4,000 in perspective is that every other critical part of the economy also needs the same people -- banks, power companies, telecom, defense contractors, civilian and state government and hospitals."

But while the hunger for cybersecurity professionals with advanced skills is very real, the supply line is near empty, he said. If the DoD wants to meet its expansion goals it will have to find innovative ways*** to find talent, Paller said.

Why US being way behind most countries in teaching math and sciences (i.e. logical thought in problem solving) is a "big deal."

*** Perhaps hire some much better educated in math and sciences Chinese and Russians!

There is one growing US "industry" the poorly educated US youth is finding work in: Strip the copper wires out of foreclosed or abandoned homes during a night and quickly sell the copper. Get at least $3.50 per pound or more if the wires are still usable for wiring. This is one reason why banks willingly sell foreclosed property for LESS than the mortgage due. - "Short sales" they call that.

 

[joepistole]

No. All you need to do to get above 8% is to count those who looked for work for several months and then realized they were wasting time and money so they ceased looking. (Some have become "self-employed" in various crimes as I describe at the end of this post.)

So you think people are just so discouraged, they are going to forego their unemployment checks, Food stamps and other public aid and live on the streets and starve? Really? If people want to drop out of the work force, then they need to be independently wealthy or have someone else who is willing to support them or want to live homeless and starve on the streets. Because all government support programs require able bodied beneficiaries who are capable of work to actively seek work or retraining.

The definition of unemployed means people want to be employed and are actively seeking employment. If people are not looking for employment they are not counted as unemployed because they have made a conscious decision to tale themselves out of the labor market for whatever reason. We don’t count people in schools as unemployed because they are not seeking employment. We don’t count nursing home residents as unemployed, because they are not seeking unemployment. I am 58 years old and retired; people like me are not counted as unemployed because we are not seeking employment. So the only way you can get the unemployment rate above 8% is to start counting employed people as you and Michael have done.

Additionally, US crime statistics don’t support your claims of rising crime in the US. Crime in the US is at historic lows.

http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Justic...st-point-in-decades.-Why-America-is-safer-now

I think the "labor force participation" rate gives a more realistic picture of the job market. - As I recall it has never been as low as it is now. In some recent months both the number of new jobs created and the official unemployment rate have dropped as those ceasing to look for work more than compensated for the decreasing rate of job creation. Here is graph:
I.e. more young potential workers are entering the labor force than jobs are being created for them and even the unusually high rate of older workers leaving (>10,000 per day baby boomers retiring) can not compensate - make the participation rate rise.
The simple truth is that the economy is so bad that it is producing jobs at a much lower rate than required for all to find work.

The reason fewer people are participating in the labor force today is because of the Baby Boomers, like me. We are retiring and as more of us retire and withdraw from the workplace the labor participation numbers are going to continue to decline. A declining labor force participation rate does not mean that people are deciding to withdraw from the labor market out of frustration and choosing starvation and homelessness as a viable alternative to work. And a declining labor participation number doesn’t mean new entrants into the job market cannot get jobs.

Labor Force = Unemployed + Employed
Labor Force Participation Rate = Labor Force/Total Population.

In part this is the fault of the education system - there are plenty of jobs for designers of robots, which make less workers needed. See quote of DoD at end.

Why US being way behind most countries in teaching math and sciences (i.e. logical thought in problem solving) is a "big deal."

*** Perhaps hire some much better educated in math and sciences Chinese and Russians!

The US educational system is another issue. But it isn’t really that relevant to the employment issue at the moment. Globalization is an issue, labor in developing countries competing with labor in developed nations. Automation and robots pose another long term threat to employment and will need to be addressed as some point. But for now, the US economy is doing quite well, especially when compared to many countries around the world (e.g. Iceland).

There is one growing US "industry" the poorly educated US youth is finding work in: Strip the copper wires out of foreclosed or abandoned homes during a night and quickly sell the copper. Get at least $3.50 per pound or more if the wires are still usable for wiring. This is one reason why banks willingly sell foreclosed property for LESS than the mortgage due. - "Short sales" they call that.

Vacant homes have always been the target of vandals and thieves that is not new. And the crime statistics just don’t support your notion that crime is a growing industry in the US. Crime rates are at historic lows in the US, per earlier comments.

 

[Billy T]

So you think people are just so discouraged, they are going to forego their unemployment checks, Food stamps and other public aid and live on the streets and starve?

No, not starve on the streets. There are many private as well as public sources of food. US food stamp program is at an all time high participation rate and many church etc. organizations are stressed to find funds to feel all who seek help. When a family is on the food stamp program do all have to prove they were seeking work? How do they do that? What if anything prevents them from saying: "Yes I went to X last week, but they were not hiring." Do you have a link that even states what type of proof of "work seeking" is required?

I thought the food stamp program, especially when there are children benefiting, was "need based" - no need to be seeking a job to qualify, but I could be wrong - if so you should be able to show (with link) that I am. Later in your post your, you said: "Because all government support programs require able bodied beneficiaries who are capable of work to actively seek work or retraining."

You do know, I assume that the fastest growing "welfare program" is the disability insurance program - a "back injury" is very hard to prove is only fabricated. Again I ask what prevents program applicant from claiming or pretending to have sought work.

... the crime statistics just don’t support your notion that crime is a growing industry in the US. Crime rates are at historic lows in the US, ... http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Justic...st-point-in-decades.-Why-America-is-safer-now

Yes serious / violent crime is down, but I was speaking of non-violent economic crimes by those who cannot find work (other than stealing, drug dealing, etc.). Here is what your link actually says:
"The crime rate for serious crimes, including murder, rape, and assault, has dropped significantly since the early 1990s in part because of changes in technology and policing, experts say."

...The reason fewer people are participating in the labor force today is because of the Baby Boomers, like me. We are retiring and as more of us retire and withdraw from the workplace the labor participation numbers are going to continue to decline.

That is technically correct because the "labor force" definition does not include those who want to work but cannot find a job. I.e. to be counted in the "unemployed" you must be actively seeking a job no mater how long you tried but failed to find a job and finally gave up wasting time and money seeking job that does not exist for you.

The proper definition of the Labor Force, IMHO, should include all who want to work and are able to (not count those in prison, the army or school). Why exclude those who want to work but for whom society has no jobs? This POV will become more obviously correct in a decade or so when robots do most of the work and it is then obvious there are not enough jobs (at least not for the poorly educated typical US students who cannot design robots or advanced electronics, etc.) for all who want and need a job.

Instead of: "Labor Force = Unemployed + Employed" it should be: "Labor Force = 'Willing and able workers without jobs' + Employed"
Then those who have wasted 6 months and considerable funds looking for a job before learning society had none for them would still be counted in the potential labor force.

"Potential" as perhaps the US should do as China does - make simple jobs that they can do for them - perhaps state farms making local produce, even if it must be sold at a loss to compete in the market place with the low cost production of vast mid west based agri- corporations. China has many state owned production centers that lose money, but very little welfare / unemployment costs as compensation.

For example some low skill workers may be assembling simple electric fans from $20 of parts made in some other state factory. The fans may sell in the market place for $100 each with two produced each day per worker but cost $110 dollars each to produce. $18o dollars of that $220 cost is the daily salary of the low skilled worker with the $40 being the cost of the parts. Those 180 dollars lets him live with dignity a modest life.

The US alternative approach to this "low skilled laborer" problem is to just give him the $180 per day he needs to live on (perhaps part in food stamps) with no self respect as a contributing member of society.

Summary of this example: Daily cost to China of this low skilled worker´s support is production cost = 2x$110 - 2x100 the fans sold for. = $20.
Daily cost of the US´s "give simple grants" system is $180 and there is no fan made helping to keep others cool nor does the worker living on welfare have much self esteem or give his children a good work ethic attitude - encourage them to get better educated than the worker was, etc.

Grand summary: For better economy, more self respect in the workers, and better motivation of children by parents to get more education than parents had US needs to make subsidized jobs for all who want to work and can*, even if their salaries exceed the value of their production.

If the US had half a brain they would adopt the Chinese subsidized State employment system for all who can not be profitably employed, as a replacement for the much more expensive and personal values destroying welfare system. China has essentially only medical welfare cost, zero unemployment and labor shortages in most regions for skilled labor with 8% GDP growth!

* That is the true potential work force, not just the "officially unemployed" + the "employed." It is society´s duty to either educate its willing workers for profit making jobs OR failing that, make subsidized jobs for the less well educated. Both for moral reasons and for better net economy that near zero welfare cost provides. In the US with definitions a lawyer would be proud of, we define away the true unemployment problem and needlessly expand the cost of welfare while destroying self esteem! No wonder the US is in deep economic trouble and China is prospering with 4+ times the US´s growth rate. Also most of what China is making will have value two years from now, not be 2/3 consumption with no lasting value.

 

[Workaholic]

Regarding the unemployment definitions, here is what I found:

http://www.shadowstats.com/alternate_data/unemployment-charts
http://www.globaleconomicandinvestm...ate--official-u-3-a-u-6-vs-sgs-alternate.html

In 1994, during the Clinton Administration, "discouraged workers"—those who had given up looking for a job because there were no jobs to be had—were redefined so as to be counted only if they had been "discouraged" for less than a year. This time qualification defined away the long-term discouraged workers. The remaining short-term discouraged workers (less than one year) are included in U-6.

Adding the SGS estimate of excluded long-term discouraged workers back into the total unemployed and labor force, unemployment—more in line with common experience as estimated by the SGS-Alternate Unemployment Measure—held at 22.8% in September, the same as in August, and down from 22.9% in July. The SGS estimate generally is built on top of the official U-6 reporting, and tends to follow its relative monthly movements. Accordingly, the SGS measure will suffer some of the current seasonal-adjustment woes afflicting the base series.

There continues to be a noticeable divergence, however, in the ShadowStats.com series versus U-6. The reason for this is that U-6, again, only includes discouraged workers who have been discouraged for less than a year. As the discouraged-worker status ages, those that go beyond one year fall off the government counting, and new workers enter "discouraged" status. Accordingly, with the continual rollover, the flow of headline workers continues into the short-term discouraged workers (U-6), and from U-6 into long-term discouraged worker status (ShadowStats.com Measure), at what has been an accelerating pace. The aggregate August data show an increasing rate of individuals dropping out of the headline (U-3) labor force.

As discussed in previous writings, an Unemployment Rate nearing 23.0% might raise questions in terms of a comparison with the purported peak unemployment in the Great Depression (1933) of 25.0%. The SGS level likely is about as bad as the peak unemployment seen in the 1973 to 1975 recession. The Great Depression Unemployment Rate was estimated well after the fact, with 27.0% of those employed working on farms. Today, less that 2.0% work on farms. Accordingly, for purposes of Great Depression comparison, I would look at the estimated peak nonfarm unemployment rate in 1933 of 34.0% to 35.0%.

U3 - Only includes people actively looking for jobs
U6 - Includes people who have given up looking for jobs in the short term
SGS Alternate - Includes people who have given up looking for jobs in the long term

The U3/U6 definitions are the official numbers used by the BLS

 

[joepistole]

No, not starve on the streets. There are many private as well as public sources of food. US food stamp program is at an all time high participation rate and many church etc. organizations are stressed to find funds to feel all who seek help. When a family is on the food stamp program do all have to prove they were seeking work? How do they do that? What if anything prevents them from saying: "Yes I went to X last week, but they were not hiring." Do you have a link that even states what type of proof of "work seeking" is required?

“With some exceptions, able-bodied adults between 16 and 60 must register for work, accept suitable employment, and take part in an employment and training program to which they are referred by the local office. Failure to comply with these requirements can result in disqualification from the Program.”

http://www.fns.usda.gov/snap/applicant_recipients/eligibility.htm#employment

I thought the food stamp program, especially when there are children benefiting, was "need based" - no need to be seeking a job to qualify, but I could be wrong - if so you should be able to show (with link) that I am. Later in your post your, you said: "Because all government support programs require able bodied beneficiaries who are capable of work to actively seek work or retraining."

Welfare reform passed almost 2 decades ago requires able bodied individuals must work or be in job training in order to receive welfare benefits, including food stamps (i.e. SNAP). So your notion that people are leaving the workforce and foregoing welfare all government assistance programs in preference for a life of crime or poverty and starvation on the streets just is not borne out by evidence or reason.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Personal_Responsibility_and_Work_Opportunity_Act

You do know, I assume that the fastest growing "welfare program" is the disability insurance program - a "back injury" is very hard to prove is only fabricated. Again I ask what prevents program applicant from claiming or pretending to have sought work.Yes serious / violent crime is down, but I was speaking of non-violent economic crimes by those who cannot find work (other than stealing, drug dealing, etc.). Here is what your link actually says:
"The crime rate for serious crimes, including murder, rape, and assault, has dropped significantly since the early 1990s in part because of changes in technology and policing, experts say."That is technically correct because the "labor force" definition does not include those who want to work but cannot find a job. I.e. to be counted in the "unemployed" you must be actively seeking a job no mater how long you tried but failed to find a job and finally gave up wasting time and money seeking job that does not exist for you.

So you want me to believe that people are getting frustrated with attempting to get jobs so they are resorting to welfare fraud? Where is your proof that people are dropping out of the labor force and resorting to welfare fraud?

With respect to crime, crime rates are down. You want to quibble about the types of crime? Burglaries are down too.

http://www2.fbi.gov/ucr/cius2009/offenses/property_crime/burglary.html

The proper definition of the Labor Force, IMHO, should include all who want to work and are able to (not count those in prison, the army or school). Why exclude those who want to work but for whom society has no jobs? This POV will become more obviously correct in a decade or so when robots do most of the work and it is then obvious there are not enough jobs (at least not for the poorly educated typical US students who cannot design robots or advanced electronics, etc.) for all who want and need a job.

The unemployment number does include people who want to work but for whom society has no job. That is the whole point of the unemployment number. To be counted as unemployed, people have to be unemployed and actively looking for work. People in prison, school/training, nursing homes, retired, etc. are not counted as unemployed because they are not looking for work. If people are not looking for work, they are not counted as unemployed. And that is perfectly sensible. If people stop looking for work, they will never be employed. In order to get work, people must look for it.

 

[LaurieAG]

Instead of: "Labor Force = Unemployed + Employed" it should be: "Labor Force = 'Willing and able workers without jobs' + Employed"
Then those who have wasted 6 months and considerable funds looking for a job before learning society had none for them would still be counted in the potential labor force.

Billy T, that should be Labor Force = Willing and able workers without jobs (U) + Casually employed (CU, underemployed) + Full Time employed (FT)

if a = U, b = CU and c = FT

(1) a(U) + b(CU) + c(FT) = x

(2) a(U) + b(CU) + (c/2)(CU) + (c/2)(FT) still equals the same x

(3) (a/2)(U) + b(CU) + (a/2)(CU) + (c/2)(CU) + (C/2)FT equals the same x

So if a = 10, b =40 and c = 50 at the start

(1) 10 + 40 + 50 = 100

(2) 10 + (40 + 25) + 25 = 100

(3) 5 + (40 + 5 + 25) + 25 = 100

The only problem is that CU goes from 40 to 70 % of the workforce in (3) while FT is halved along with U.

BTW, I don't think doing this is ethical.

 

[Billy T]

Billy T, that should be Labor Force = Willing and able workers without jobs (U) + Casually employed (CU, underemployed) + Full Time employed (FT)

if a = U, b = CU and c = FT

(1) a(U) + b(CU) + c(FT) = x

(2) a(U) + b(CU) + (c/2)(CU) + (c/2)(FT) still equals the same x ...

I can´t follow you. In part because of your following math error:

If subtract equation (1) from equation (2) we have:

(c/2)(CU) - (c/2)(FT) = 0 which is the claim CU = FT and that is not true.

Tell in words what you are trying to do and what is not ethical.

 

[Billy T]

... Welfare reform passed almost 2 decades ago requires able bodied individuals must work or be in job training in order to receive welfare benefits, including food stamps (i.e. SNAP). ... So you want me to believe that people are getting frustrated with attempting to get jobs so they are resorting to welfare fraud? Where is your proof that people are dropping out of the labor force and resorting to welfare fraud? ...

Some probably are "gaming the system" / making fraudulent claims especially the more than doubling of back injury claims, but the terrible economy is also part of the reason disability claims and food stamps users are strongly up:

Mitt Romney claims President Barack Obama caused a doubling of able-bodied persons on food stamps by taking “work out of the food stamps requirement.” That’s an exaggeration. All but four states had already received waivers from specific work requirements for some or all of their residents before Obama became president.

The total number of persons getting food stamps is up 46 percent since Obama took office, a big jump but far short of a doubling. Romney is referring only to single, childless adults of working age, who normally qualify for food stamps for only three months unless they work part-time or live in areas where jobs are scarce or unemployment tops 10 percent.

The number of those single adults getting food stamps did double about the same time that Obama granted a blanket suspension of that work requirement for 18 months as part of his 2009 stimulus law. But the Bush administration had already granted waivers covering some or all of 46 states and the District of Columbia, and more waiver requests were pending as the economy tanked.

I may have been overly influenced by Romney´s claim as he never soften it. CNN´s factcheck.org shows it is only true that sub group of food stamp user did double under Obama; However, note the "work requirement" you cite was relaxed even before Obama took office in 46 of the states and DC.

When Mr. Obama was sworn into office in January 2009, 31,983,716 individuals received food stamps. ... As of September 2012 (the most recent month the USDA has reported), 47,710,324 individuals {up 50% !} — or 1 in 7 Americans—were on food stamps.

In January 2009, the month Obama was inaugurated, there were 7,442,377 Americans collecting federal disability insurance, according to the Social Security Administration. By December 2012, the latest month reported, there were 8,827,795 collecting disability, an increase of 1,385,418. {up 19%}

... why the disability rolls have grown. The most important factor is the liberalization of the DI screening process that occurred due to a 1984 law. This law directed the Social Security Administration to place more weight on applicants' reported pain and discomfort, relax its screening of mental illness, consider applicants with multiple non-severe ailments, ...

These changes had the effect of both increasing the number of new DI awards and shifting their composition towards claimants with low-mortality disorders. For example, the share of awards for a primary impairment of mental illness rose from 16 percent in 1983 to 25 percent in 2003, while the share for a primary impairment of musculoskeletal disorders (primarily back pain) rose from 13 per-cent in 1983 to 26 percent in 2003.

Back Pain claims percent of total doubled and total claims are also up. So back pain claims have more than doubled! Very hard to show any are fraud, but I think some are. Note also when disability is claimed, you are no longer "unemployed" so also cease being part of the labor force and that lowers the participation rate too.

If you like, I withdraw my suggestion that there is more fraud now (as I can not prove that, especially with impossible to disprove back pain and mental illness claims). But then you must admit the surge up in clams is due only the economy steadily growing worse for the lower income groups. DEAL?

The "middle class" is shrinking as percent and the poor are an increasing faction so IMHO, more are "gaming the system" than ever before to make ends meet.

 

[Michael]

U.S. Economy Unexpectedly Contracts in Fourth Quarter

You read it correctly. The US's gross domestic product actually shrank. And that was in the run up of the POTUS election cycle when billions were being spent. Get this, as soon as the government even begins to cut back a little on spending - this phony "economic growth" reverses direction and starts imploding. Gee Joe, I guess digging holes and filling them in doesn't work. I guess bailing out the too big to fail banks so they could rush into commodities and push up the price of energy and food (which isn't counted in inflation because, hey, only the peons spend most of their money on energy and food) doesn't work. I guess inflation actually makes people poorer. Taxing the 'rich' makes them move the money overseas and NOT create jobs our K-12 Government school Cog of a society desperately need. I guess Krugman was wrong, bombing the shit out of women and child only wastes our resources, destroys our economy and destroyed their entire way of life while undermining ours.

Gee, who'd of thought bailing out the rich, their banks and their military investments....would help THEM and not the Gods Damn poor?!? Weird.......

The only thing keeping this phone economy limping along is paper money AKA TRILLIONS and TRILLIONS in debt. Thank your public 'service' unions for the 100 Trillion in obligations YOU and YOUR children will have to pay.

Either the Fed keeps running the printing presses at full tilt and we collapse the dollar and enter a Hyperinflationary Depression or it doesn't and we sink into what has been evident for 6 years now: The Mother of All Depressions.

We've enter a new normal where getting on SSI, claiming disability and trying any and every way imaginable to get free money is the new norm. Where University Graduate compete with HS students to get 'jobs' at McDonalds. Where living at home until the age of 40 and never starting a family is the new norm. Should be a good time to invest in online gaming companies because that's what those few of you left paying taxes will be paying other people to do instead of working and being productive, raising a family and being part of a community. This is what the State does, it undermines society and destroys it just as any parasitic cancerous organism will do when left to grow and consume more than it's host can sustain. Government School teachers by and large send THEIR children to private school. Think about that.



The Federal Reserve and Little Timmy bailed out the rich and the mega banks they own without bothering to go to CONgress. AND worse still, when our so-called Civil "Servants" in CONgress were pressed by their financial backers, they gladly came together GOP and DEM hand in hand to dump TRILLIONS more onto the backs of the Americans middle class .........over a weekend. A few hours of 'negotiations' (Dahhhh where me sign name?) Yeah, the same ones go right back to pretending to be at one another's throat over a couple hundred billion, not even enough to pay for a week of the Wars, oh and can't agree on anything - YET, they all agreed to bail out the rich and the banks the rich own stock in ... and it took them about 6 hours to 'come together for the 'Good of the Nation'.

The Common Good
The Glory of God

Welcome to the inevitable outcome of The State and the violence it represents. Like the ring in the Lord of the Rings. The temptation to use violence, legal violence, is too great. AND the moral decay only makes it that much easier. The one and only institutions that can initiate violence against the citizens and it now controls every aspect of your life, it sells Bonds on your children's labor, it inflates your savings/taxes you again on your labor, you can't even take a shit in your own house without every step to the door and wipe of your arse being regulated by the government. If history is anything to go by, our Leaders... Oh, I mean Servants will frog march your children off to die in another War. Not their children. Hell, they don't even send their kids to Government School, no way - only Private Education for their own. They sure as hell won't send them to die in a war, unless it's sitting safely under a mountain somewhere steering a drone.


Good thing Big Government is protecting you from Apple and Google.... ooooo so scary, wouldn't want them offering you a cheap smart phone super computer for a couple hundred dollars. Thank God we have the Central State looking after us and protecting us from Muslim Terrorists with TSA sticking their fingers in your arse looking for a Muslim hiding in there.

Moo Moo Moooooooo...............

 

[joepistole]

U.S. Economy Unexpectedly Contracts in Fourth Quarter
You read it correctly. The US's gross domestic product actually shrank. And that was in the run up of the POTUS election cycle when billions were being spent. Get this, as soon as the government even begins to cut back a little on spending - this phony "economic growth" reverses direction and starts imploding. Gee Joe, I guess digging holes and filling them in doesn't work. I guess bailing out the too big to fail banks so they could rush into commodities and push up the price of energy and food (which isn't counted in inflation because, hey, only the peons spend most of their money on energy and food) doesn't work. I guess inflation actually makes people poorer. Taxing the 'rich' makes them move the money overseas and NOT create jobs our K-12 Government school Cog of a society desperately need. I guess Krugman was wrong, bombing the shit out of women and child only wastes our resources, destroys our economy and destroyed their entire way of life while undermining ours.
Gee, who'd of thought bailing out the rich, their banks and their military investments....would help THEM and not the Gods Damn poor?!? Weird.......
The only thing keeping this phone economy limping along is paper money AKA TRILLIONS and TRILLIONS in debt. Thank your public 'service' unions for the 100 Trillion in obligations YOU and YOUR children will have to pay.
Either the Fed keeps running the printing presses at full tilt and we collapse the dollar and enter a Hyperinflationary Depression or it doesn't and we sink into what has been evident for 6 years now: The Mother of All Depressions.
We've enter a new normal where getting on SSI, claiming disability and trying any and every way imaginable to get free money is the new norm. Where University Graduate compete with HS students to get 'jobs' at McDonalds. Where living at home until the age of 40 and never starting a family is the new norm. Should be a good time to invest in online gaming companies because that's what those few of you left paying taxes will be paying other people to do instead of working and being productive, raising a family and being part of a community. This is what the State does, it undermines society and destroys it just as any parasitic cancerous organism will do when left to grow and consume more than it's host can sustain. Government School teachers by and large send THEIR children to private school. Think about that.
The Federal Reserve and Little Timmy bailed out the rich and the mega banks they own without bothering to go to CONgress. AND worse still, when our so-called Civil "Servants" in CONgress were pressed by their financial backers, they gladly came together GOP and DEM hand in hand to dump TRILLIONS more onto the backs of the Americans middle class .........over a weekend. A few hours of 'negotiations' (Dahhhh where me sign name?) Yeah, the same ones go right back to pretending to be at one another's throat over a couple hundred billion, not even enough to pay for a week of the Wars, oh and can't agree on anything - YET, they all agreed to bail out the rich and the banks the rich own stock in ... and it took them about 6 hours to 'come together for the 'Good of the Nation'.
The Common Good
The Glory of God
Welcome to the inevitable outcome of The State and the violence it represents. Like the ring in the Lord of the Rings. The temptation to use violence, legal violence, is too great. AND the moral decay only makes it that much easier. The one and only institutions that can initiate violence against the citizens and it now controls every aspect of your life, it sells Bonds on your children's labor, it inflates your savings/taxes you again on your labor, you can't even take a shit in your own house without every step to the door and wipe of your arse being regulated by the government. If history is anything to go by, our Leaders... Oh, I mean Servants will frog march your children off to die in another War. Not their children. Hell, they don't even send their kids to Government School, no way - only Private Education for their own. They sure as hell won't send them to die in a war, unless it's sitting safely under a mountain somewhere steering a drone.
Good thing Big Government is protecting you from Apple and Google.... ooooo so scary, wouldn't want them offering you a cheap smart phone super computer for a couple hundred dollars. Thank God we have the Central State looking after us and protecting us from Muslim Terrorists with TSA sticking their fingers in your arse looking for a Muslim hiding in there.
Moo Moo Moooooooo...............

Judging from your diatribe, I may be too late. But before you get too overjoyed, you need to ask yourself, if this news is as bad as you want it to be, why isn’t the market down 400 points or even a 100 points? Why are the markets not panicked? I’ll give you a few hints, in light of the fiscal cliff, an economic slowdown was expected. Everyone was waiting on resolution the fiscal cliff. Investors and businessmen were not convinced Republicans wouldn’t send the nation into insolvency (e.g. fail to raise the debt ceiling). Two, this number, like many others, are frequently revised. Three, a single measure does not a trend make.

The good news is that there are some signals that some Republicans understand the party has gotten a little out of hand and the police are about to show up on their doorstep. A few weeks ago, Republicans lifted the debt ceiling. The Republican leadership is attempting to lead, that is a good thing. Sarah Palin, one of leading voices of ignorance got her wings clipped by Fox. Republicans are dialing back the insanity meter. Those are all good things for the economy, things that have been holding the economy back. The problem is not over yet, but there are some good signs that things are a changing in Washington. We may even have a crack at responsible fiscal policy – something we have not seen in Washington for the last two years.

 

[joepistole]

Some probably are "gaming the system" / making fraudulent claims especially the more than doubling of back injury claims, but the terrible economy is also part of the reason disability claims and food stamps users are strongly up: I may have been overly influenced by Romney´s claim as he never soften it. CNN´s factcheck.org shows it is only true that sub group of food stamp user did double under Obama; However, note the "work requirement" you cite was relaxed even before Obama took office in 46 of the states and DC. Back Pain claims percent of total doubled and total claims are also up. So back pain claims have more than doubled! Very hard to show any are fraud, but I think some are. Note also when disability is claimed, you are no longer "unemployed" so also cease being part of the labor force and that lowers the participation rate too.

If you like, I withdraw my suggestion that there is more fraud now (as I can not prove that, especially with impossible to disprove back pain and mental illness claims). But then you must admit the surge up in clams is due only the economy steadily growing worse for the lower income groups. DEAL?

The "middle class" is shrinking as percent and the poor are an increasing faction so IMHO, more are "gaming the system" than ever before to make ends meet.

Where is your evidence the middle class is shrinking? The poverty rate today is what it was in 1965. It went up a bit during the recession, 2008-2010. But it has been basically flat since 2010.
http://www.census.gov/hhes/www/poverty/data/incpovhlth/2011/tables.html
Figures: Number in Poverty and Poverty Rate: 1959 to 2011

So no, with the exception of the recession where it was to be expected, I don’t see evidence the middle class is shrinking. And I don’t see any evidence that more people are gaming the system or that the unemployment numbers are in any way misrepresenting the employment situation in The United States.

 

[billvon]

Where is your evidence the middle class is shrinking? The poverty rate today is what it was in 1965. It went up a bit during the recession, 2008-2010. But it has been basically flat since 2010.

Income disparity has gone up dramatically since 1970. The rich are making far more than the poor now, on average. That's the bad news, depending how you read it. The good news is that the poor are not making less; the lower 20% are making about the same in "real" dollars as they were 40 years ago, and everyone else is doing better. So the middle class is shrinking but that's happening due to the upper class "absorbing" some of them.

 

[Michael]

Judging from your diatribe, I may be too late. But before you get too overjoyed, you need to ask yourself, if this news is as bad as you want it to be, why isn’t the market down 400 points or even a 100 points? Why are the markets not panicked? I’ll give you a few hints, in light of the fiscal cliff, an economic slowdown was expected. Everyone was waiting on resolution the fiscal cliff. Investors and businessmen were not convinced Republicans wouldn’t send the nation into insolvency (e.g. fail to raise the debt ceiling). Two, this number, like many others, are frequently revised. Three, a single measure does not a trend make.

The good news is that there are some signals that some Republicans understand the party has gotten a little out of hand and the police are about to show up on their doorstep. A few weeks ago, Republicans lifted the debt ceiling. The Republican leadership is attempting to lead, that is a good thing. Sarah Palin, one of leading voices of ignorance got her wings clipped by Fox. Republicans are dialing back the insanity meter. Those are all good things for the economy, things that have been holding the economy back. The problem is not over yet, but there are some good signs that things are a changing in Washington. We may even have a crack at responsible fiscal policy – something we have not seen in Washington for the last two years.

Here's a fact Joe, the economy is being eviscerated by the Crony Capitalist who run WallStreet and own Washington and their Bankster Enablers, who are more than often one and the same.

The stock market is up because Ben Bernanke has the stated goal of inflating the price of stocks. Because in his warped world if the stock price is up, then people 'feel good' and they go get into deeper debt buying shit made in China. Get this Joe, the top 1% owns 33% of the stock market. The top 10% owns 66%. That means the bottom 90% share 33%. You think if the stock price goes up that some part-time McJob employee wants to go out and start a family?! Buy a new car? Buy a new house? You've got to be kidding me?!?! University grads are moving back home. The population replacement rate is at the lowest it's been since the last Depression the Federal Reserve created.


Do I want the news to be bad? Yes and No. I want this fraudulent system to end. I want to live in a country where we don't have a competition between Warmonger ChickenHawks and WelfareQueen Progressives on who can use the Federal Government to destroy our way of life the fastest. I don't want to live under a system where a few douche-bags in a Washington Bubble can decide the fate of my family. That's sick in the head Joe. Where Trillions of dollars in Bonds are sold on the backs of the unborn. Where inflation isn't a crime, but the norm. Where Trillions are wasted in made-up Wars. I don't want my children to live in a world where some f*cking bureaucrat with the title POTUS is worshiped as a God by sheep-minded citizens, instead of despised for the demagogue he really is (and I'm not just referring to Obama here). Where our Civil "Servant" is given the legal right to unilaterally murder American teenagers and then get re-elected, or to send drones to murder women and children in other parts of the world, where the TSA pretends I may be a Muslim Terrorist and pulls me out of a line to be searched - occasional taking shit I own and keeping it. Or where I'm not legally allowed to carry too much alcohol.... no no, have to limit that by law to a few liters. That's 500mL over- PAY your TAX! You Use the Roads! How f*cking asinine! Or where the Police set up speed traps just to make 'their numbers' at the end of the month. That's a sickness Joe. Where 6 week olds are put in daycare and 4 year olds on anti-anxiety pills.

This society is sick in the head.



I'd much prefer if I live through this horrible transition so that everyone's future children may enjoy a better world free as was the intent of the Founders, particularly Franklin and Jefferson; not as Chattel on a Debt Farm. Where the Central Bank dies it quick and painful death and society moves on to a better more equitable monetary system. So, let's hope BillyT is correct and the entire house of cards collapses in one big huff. Because if I'm correct, then this IS the new norm - and so I hope you like it, because it's here to stay. I hope it's everything you wanted it to be Joe. Because your beloved Central Planners are working very tirelessly to ensure a nice stable shitty poor way of life for generations and generations to come. Less prosperity, and a hell of a lot more State regulation... for you own good. We are only peons after all. It's not like we can look after ourselves. Nope, we need the State to do that for us. I imagine that if worse comes to worse, they'll whip up a War.


If we had followed Icelands example we'd be through three years ago, debt free, a small government and life would be much more prosperous.

 

[Michael]

Where is your evidence the middle class is shrinking? The poverty rate today is what it was in 1965. It went up a bit during the recession, 2008-2010. But it has been basically flat since 2010.
http://www.census.gov/hhes/www/poverty/data/incpovhlth/2011/tables.html
Figures: Number in Poverty and Poverty Rate: 1959 to 2011

So no, with the exception of the recession where it was to be expected, I don’t see evidence the middle class is shrinking. And I don’t see any evidence that more people are gaming the system or that the unemployment numbers are in any way misrepresenting the employment situation in The United States.

Joe, you do understand that in 1965 it took ONE FATHER working ONE JOB to take care of a wife and five children and afford all of the amenities of the middle class. It now takes BOTH husband and wife working (or couple living together) working at a minimum of 40 hours a week EACH (that's 80 hours at 80% higher productive efficiency) with ZERO children to barely make ends meet.


That's what you don't seem to account for. Why? How do YOU explain that?



The Federal, State, City and Country Governments are literally sucking the life out of the economy. AND some sociopathic Democrats want to grow the government UP another 5%!! To 25% GDP!?!?! Jesus H Christ... you'll soon see TSA hole diggers at the malls, schools, everywhere. Meanwhile the GOP couldn't expand the Military War machine any faster! It's like two wolves devouring the last bit of sinew, skin and bone from the carcass of what was the US economy.

 

[joepistole]

Here's a fact Joe, the economy is being eviscerated by the Crony Capitalist who run WallStreet and own Washington and their Bankster Enablers, who are more than often one and the same.

If that is so, then why do you always advocate protection to those same crony capitalists?

The stock market is up because Ben Bernanke has the stated goal of inflating the price of stocks. Because in his warped world if the stock price is up, then people 'feel good' and they go get into deeper debt buying shit made in China. Get this Joe, the top 1% owns 33% of the stock market. The top 10% owns 66%. That means the bottom 90% share 33%. You think if the stock price goes up that some part-time McJob employee wants to go out and start a family?! Buy a new car? Buy a new house? You've got to be kidding me?!?! University grads are moving back home. The population replacement rate is at the lowest it's been since the last Depression the Federal Reserve created.

And I bet you have dinner with Martians every evening too.

Do I want the news to be bad? Yes and No. I want this fraudulent system to end. I want to live in a country where we don't have a competition between Warmonger ChickenHawks and WelfareQueen Progressives on who can use the Federal Government to destroy our way of life the fastest. I don't want to live under a system where a few douche-bags in a Washington Bubble can decide the fate of my family. That's sick in the head Joe. Where Trillions of dollars in Bonds are sold on the backs of the unborn. Where inflation isn't a crime, but the norm. Where Trillions are wasted in made-up Wars. I don't want my children to live in a world where some f*cking bureaucrat with the title POTUS is worshiped as a God by sheep-minded citizens, instead of despised for the demagogue he really is (and I'm not just referring to Obama here). Where our Civil "Servant" is given the legal right to unilaterally murder American teenagers and then get re-elected, or to send drones to murder women and children in other parts of the world, where the TSA pretends I may be a Muslim Terrorist and pulls me out of a line to be searched - occasional taking shit I own and keeping it. Or where I'm not legally allowed to carry too much alcohol.... no no, have to limit that by law to a few liters. That's 500mL over- PAY your TAX! You Use the Roads! How f*cking asinine! Or where the Police set up speed traps just to make 'their numbers' at the end of the month. That's a sickness Joe. Where 6 week olds are put in daycare and 4 year olds on anti-anxiety pills.

Yes you do want bad things to happen to this economy. You have openly written same many times over the course of many years. And you want to replace our current set up with systems that have been used in the past and failed.

This society is sick in the head.

Is it?

I'd much prefer if I live through this horrible transition so that everyone's future children may enjoy a better world free as was the intent of the Founders, particularly Franklin and Jefferson; not as Chattel on a Debt Farm. Where the Central Bank dies it quick and painful death and society moves on to a better more equitable monetary system. So, let's hope BillyT is correct and the entire house of cards collapses in one big huff. Because if I'm correct, then this IS the new norm - and so I hope you like it, because it's here to stay. I hope it's everything you wanted it to be Joe. Because your beloved Central Planners are working very tirelessly to ensure a nice stable shitty poor way of life for generations and generations to come. Less prosperity, and a hell of a lot more State regulation... for you own good. We are only peons after all. It's not like we can look after ourselves. Nope, we need the State to do that for us. I imagine that if worse comes to worse, they'll whip up a War.
If we had followed Icelands example we'd be through three years ago, debt free, a small government and life would be much more prosperous.

We were through it three years ago. The US economy has been growing for three years now. You just don’t want to admit it because you want our economy to collapse and burn. You want a depression, per your own admission. That is probably why you continue to ignore reality, continue to ignore facts that run counter to your desires. As I previously pointed out, Iceland’s recession was 4 times more severe and lasted twice as long. Given your preference for financial ruin, I can understand why you want the Iceland model.

 

[joepistole]

Joe, you do understand that in 1965 it took ONE FATHER working ONE JOB to take care of a wife and five children and afford all of the amenities of the middle class. It now takes BOTH husband and wife working (or couple living together) working at a minimum of 40 hours a week EACH (that's 80 hours at 80% higher productive efficiency) with ZERO children to barely make ends meet.

That's what you don't seem to account for. Why? How do YOU explain that?

I guess that explains why in 1965 my father and mother were both working to support a family with 3 children – all of our neighbors were in a similar boat. You need to get your facts right Michael.

The Federal, State, City and Country Governments are literally sucking the life out of the economy. AND some sociopathic Democrats want to grow the government UP another 5%!! To 25% GDP!?!?! Jesus H Christ... you'll soon see TSA hole diggers at the malls, schools, everywhere. Meanwhile the GOP couldn't expand the Military War machine any faster! It's like two wolves devouring the last bit of sinew, skin and bone from the carcass of what was the US economy.

LOL, and where did you get this revelation Michael? You wouldn’t have any proofs would you? Of course not, you never do, you just make this stuff up.

 

[billvon]

I guess that explains why in 1965 my father and mother were both working to support a family with 3 children – all of our neighbors were in a similar boat. You need to get your facts right Michael.

My family was in a similar boat. My mother took a few years off to have us (3 kids total) then had to go back to work.