Economic rebound picks up

[Kidlicious]

The funny thing is you beat me by 4 minutes the first time and 5 minutes the second time. I must be slow.

[Velociryx]

Here's one for the books! I'm agreeing with the reds!

The unemployment rate's drop (given that the drop was fuelled not by job creation, but by people vanishing from the roster) is hardly an indication of economic recovery.

There are some short term forces at work in the market that are providing some gains, but without a fundamental shift, those gains will not be permanant (and this is *exactly* why employers have not yet begun to add to their payrolls again....they're waiting to see how it plays, and how long-term and strong the recovery signs that ARE in the market (and there are some....unemployment not being one of them, however), before committing to adding to the payroll.

In short: Too early to say what'll happen, but clearly the economy is not on the rebound yet.

-=Vel=-

[GePap]

So the thread is given a second chance of life..how long till it is Fezzed to death yet again?

[Kidlicious]

Consumer spending has to increase much faster to keep up with the productivity gains. Even then the trade deficit is likely to also increase which will also slow job growth.

[Velociryx]

We're on the same page in this one, Kid....I got your back here...

-=Vel=-

[GePap]

I wonder how much of the increased customer spending was people using the money they got from re-financing their mortages at rock bottom rates. Now that rates ae slightly moving upward, and applications for new mortages have dropped significantly, will customers finally have to cut back, since they have few new sources of cash?

[Tingkai]

I never realised that the Republicans really screwed the poor. The info shown by Kidacious clearly shows what the Republicans did to them. The poor were earning less money after 12 years of Reagan and Bush foolish squandering of tax dollars and tax cuts to the rich.

The fact that household incomes for the poor increased almost every year during Clinton's presidency shows that he was a much better president than Reagan and Bush.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Only if you are the type of person that believe the President sets much economic policy or has much to do with the economic performance of the country at all .

[monkspider]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
Only if you are the type of person that believe the President sets much economic policy or has much to do with the economic performance of the country at all .

So I take it that you are the type of person who thinks it is mere coincidence that the economy always tanks under republican presidents?

[Imran Siddiqui]

So I take it that you are the type of person who thinks it is mere coincidence that the economy always tanks under republicans presidents?

A quick look at the 1950s and the late 1980s shows this statement to be quite eroneous .

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by Velociryx
We're on the same page in this one, Kid....I got your back here...

-=Vel=-

That's nice for a change

[Giancarlo]

Originally posted by Odin
Fez is BURNNED!

Burned by what? Misplaced evidence that is not supporting those who are attacking me?

You ****ing idiot.

Those numbers brought up by Boris is disputing the evidence I provided, thus it is in inaccurate. Kiddo, is acting like an idiot.

[Boris Godunov]

Originally posted by Fez
Those numbers brought up by Boris is disputing the evidence I provided, thus it is in inaccurate. Kiddo, is acting like an idiot.

Um, Fez, the numbers I provided didn't dispute the Cato numbers, merely showed that Cato was using a slanted interpretation by not presenting actual numbers, just percentages.

I don't think you could say my source was inaccurate, since the numbers came from the U.S. Census Bureau.

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by GePap
I wonder how much of the increased customer spending was people using the money they got from re-financing their mortages at rock bottom rates. Now that rates ae slightly moving upward, and applications for new mortages have dropped significantly, will customers finally have to cut back, since they have few new sources of cash?

I think what will really hurt is that new home construction will probably decline. That will cut into jobs directly. Construction has already taken a hit from slack business spending. New home purchases have done a lot to keep us out of deep trouble.

[Giancarlo]

Originally posted by Boris Godunov


Um, Fez, the numbers I provided didn't dispute the Cato numbers, merely showed that Cato was using a slanted interpretation by not presenting actual numbers, just percentages.

Is that a problem? Reagan was good for the country, better than some dumb@$$ democrat, like Carter or Mondale.

I don't think you could say my source was inaccurate, since the numbers came from the U.S. Census Bureau.

My source used US Census Bureau statistics aswell.