|
|
We appreciate your help
in keeping this site going.
|
|
11-15-2012, 01:08 PM
|
|
Senior Member
|
|
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Sonoma County, CA
Posts: 20,496
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by whell
In the 16 U.S. recessions since 1919, the average length has been 13 months, although the recent recessions have been shorter. Thus if the 2008 recession followed the average, the downturn in the stock market would have bottomed around November 2008. The actual US stock market bottom of the 2008 recession was in March 2009.
|
Wow! Five whole months!
None of the previous recessions was anywhere near this severe, not since 1929, and none were accompanied by the hideously suicidal obstruction that the Republicans are engaging in.
John
Last edited by Boreas; 11-15-2012 at 01:13 PM.
|
11-16-2012, 07:09 AM
|
|
Resident octogenarian
|
|
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Maryland
Posts: 20,860
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by whell
In the 16 U.S. recessions since 1919, the average length has been 13 months, although the recent recessions have been shorter. Thus if the 2008 recession followed the average, the downturn in the stock market would have bottomed around November 2008. The actual US stock market bottom of the 2008 recession was in March 2009.
|
This recession is a damn sight closer to the one in 1929 that lasted for ten years - ask me how I know.
__________________
Great minds discuss ideas; Average minds discuss events; Small minds discuss people.
Eleanor Roosevelt
|
11-16-2012, 09:07 AM
|
|
Senior Member
|
|
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Metro Detroit
Posts: 13,016
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by merrylander
This recession is a damn sight closer to the one in 1929 that lasted for ten years - ask me how I know.
|
How do you know? See my response above to Erik. Maybe one or both of you have some info that economists, who generally agree that the recession has already ended, should be aware of?
|
11-15-2012, 01:09 PM
|
|
Possibly admin. Maybe ;)
|
|
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Land of the burning river
Posts: 21,098
|
|
I was gonna say whell, not sour grapes, but partisan obstruction :wrysmile:
Pete
__________________
“How many legs does a dog have if you call the tail a leg? Four. Calling a tail a leg doesn't make it a leg.”
|
11-15-2012, 01:09 PM
|
|
Admin
|
|
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Behind the Orange Curtain in California
Posts: 37,236
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by whell
The week after the election, unemployment claims spike across the country. So much for unemployment trending down. Sure, some of the claims can be attributable to Hurricane Sandy. However, the two states with the highest number of reported claims last week were PA and OH.
http://www.dol.gov/opa/media/press/e...m#.UKUY_uRi6SF
|
How about a wider focus, Whell? 1.8 million less moochers on the dole ought to warm the cockles on every accountant's cold heart.
"The total number of people claiming benefits in all programs for the week ending October 27 was 4,977,808, a decrease of 100,423 from the previous week. There were 6,773,260 persons claiming benefits in all programs in the comparable week in 2011." From the above link
__________________
I don't know half of you half as well as I should like, and I like less than half of you half as well as you deserve.
- Mr. Underhill
Last edited by bobabode; 11-15-2012 at 01:14 PM.
|
11-15-2012, 01:26 PM
|
|
Senior Member
|
|
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Metro Detroit
Posts: 13,016
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by bobabode
How about a wider focus, Whell? 1.8 million less moochers on the dole ought to warm the cockles on every accountant's cold heart.
"The total number of people claiming benefits in all programs for the week ending October 27 was 4,977,808, a decrease of 100,423 from the previous week. There were 6,773,260 persons claiming benefits in all programs in the comparable week in 2011." From the above link
|
How 'bout these numbers:
"New figures released by the Census Bureau this week found a spike in poverty numbers last year, going from 49 million in 2010 to 49.7 million last year. The numbers may come as a surprise to Congress, which estimated in September that the poverty rate would drop to 46.2 million. One of the most startling findings showed that almost 20 percent of American children continue to live in poverty."
http://washington.cbslocal.com/2012/...cans-affected/
|
11-16-2012, 07:12 AM
|
|
Resident octogenarian
|
|
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Maryland
Posts: 20,860
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by whell
How 'bout these numbers:
"New figures released by the Census Bureau this week found a spike in poverty numbers last year, going from 49 million in 2010 to 49.7 million last year. The numbers may come as a surprise to Congress, which estimated in September that the poverty rate would drop to 46.2 million. One of the most startling findings showed that almost 20 percent of American children continue to live in poverty."
http://washington.cbslocal.com/2012/...cans-affected/
|
Because wages for the workers have actually been declining, probably so they can hand out those fat bonuses to Mahogany Row.
__________________
Great minds discuss ideas; Average minds discuss events; Small minds discuss people.
Eleanor Roosevelt
|
11-16-2012, 09:26 AM
|
|
Senior Member
|
|
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Metro Detroit
Posts: 13,016
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by merrylander
Because wages for the workers have actually been declining, probably so they can hand out those fat bonuses to Mahogany Row.
|
BS. There are a myriad of factors that have contributed to lower average wage growth. Automation, inefficiencies in manufacturing, more women in the workforce, inflation, the shift in the economy over the last 30 years from manufacturing based to services based, etc. I guess if it makes you feel better to have someone to blame for economic trends, then go ahead and blame "Mahogany Row". But you'll be no closer to the truth of the matter for all your efforts.
|
11-16-2012, 09:50 AM
|
|
Senior Member
|
|
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Sonoma County, CA
Posts: 20,496
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by whell
BS. There are a myriad of factors that have contributed to lower average wage growth. Automation, inefficiencies in manufacturing, more women in the workforce, inflation, the shift in the economy over the last 30 years from manufacturing based to services based, etc. I guess if it makes you feel better to have someone to blame for economic trends, then go ahead and blame "Mahogany Row". But you'll be no closer to the truth of the matter for all your efforts.
|
Hmmmm.........
John
|
11-16-2012, 10:18 AM
|
|
Resident octogenarian
|
|
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Maryland
Posts: 20,860
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by whell
BS. There are a myriad of factors that have contributed to lower average wage growth. Automation, inefficiencies in manufacturing, more women in the workforce, inflation, the shift in the economy over the last 30 years from manufacturing based to services based, etc. I guess if it makes you feel better to have someone to blame for economic trends, then go ahead and blame "Mahogany Row". But you'll be no closer to the truth of the matter for all your efforts.
|
Sorry but you have overlooked a couple of things yourself, why shold women working depress wages? Unless you are a male chauvinist pig, and the other big factor - greed. How else does 1% of the population get 70% of the growth in money.
__________________
Great minds discuss ideas; Average minds discuss events; Small minds discuss people.
Eleanor Roosevelt
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:34 PM.
|