Recovery - Not yet!
 

It was posted elsewhere on the forum that those evil business who are sitting on their cash troves are now starting to hire in droves. Evidence of that, if any, has failed to register in the employment market. Still waiting for the impact of all that "stimulus" that was supposed to keep unemployment from rising above 8%...way back in 2009.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-0...s-to-9-4-.html

"Employers in the U.S. added fewer jobs than forecast in December and the unemployment rate dropped, partly reflecting a shrinking workforce, a sign the labor-market recovery will take time to develop."

"The jobless rate fell to 9.4 percent, the lowest level since May 2009."

"The Fed chairman also noted that even with the expected improvements in the U.S economy, it could still take four to five years for unemployment to drop to a historically normal rate of around 6 percent. "

http://www.cnbc.com/id/40962516

Probably afraid to hire now that the number of knuckledraggers in congress just doubled.

Dave

Nothing substantial has changed there, really. The transition from arrogant know-nothings to knuckle-draggers may have little impact on the market.

Then why bother with the recent changes?

And by the way, thanks for the admission.

We like new faces in new places, even if they are a bit hairy.

You're welcome. I like to throw dinosaur bones to you every once in a while.

I don't know where any of these people get the idea that this mess would get fixed in a year or two. I think 4 or 5 years is pretty optomistic, plenty of time for crash v2 from not properly re-regulating Wall St.

All these riches on Wall St. you would think the trickle down would have us busing them in for jobs like during WW2. :p


Carl.

Under we get our heads out of our collective keisters and realize that supply-side economics coupled with lax regulation of the banking/securities industries caused the pickle we're in, we'll not turn the corner on this mess.

Lax regulation is being generous. Purposeful manipulation of the market would be more accurate. Then, here comes the arrogant know-nothing part: assuming that you can direct a mortgage industry to suspend logic when underwriting mortgages - potentially assuming that tax payers would foot the bill if something went wrong - while forgetting that real estate is an investment that can rise and fall just like any other investment.

...but their intentions were good, so we'll forgive them...

Thanks! Me like dinosaur bone! (Beats chest.)

Dave

While the brilliant idea of the securitization of mortgages certainly opened the door to expanded home ownership, it also opened the door to hucksterism and more elaborate forms of fraud/malfeasance. Yet another example of the unintended consequences of legislation outweighing the benefits methinks.

If banks simply had to hold their own mortgages, none of this would have occurred (but rates would inevitably been higher IMHO). When will we ever learn that there's no such thing as a free lunch? If something appears to be a win-win-win situation, there's gotta be an unidentified loser somewhere (and it happens to be the taxpayer in this instance).

10 years for the housing market out west.

That is the way it operates in Canada and I don't think the interest rates I paid were any higher than here. The mortgage is typically a 5/25 meaning the total term is 25 years but interest rates are negotiated every 5 years. That simply means you don't need a crystal ball to figure where rates will be over a term of 25 years.

Mortgage interest is not deductible but there is no capital gains tax on sale of your home either.

Depends on where, I can't tell you about the south part of Ca. and it really is 2 states merged @ the s*hithole aka: Bakersfield.
Up north here, San Francisco and Berkeley hardly tanked at all and have increased along with some of silicon valley and so the closer you are the better off you are. But the central valley where they threw the most subprime loan money around is sure a different story. Down south over the grapevine probably is the same I would imagine.

I'll never understand how the mortgage brokers were ever allowed to write loans for 125% of the appraised value of a home with payments which wouldn't even cover the interest.

If that wasn't an invitation to commit fraud, I don't know what is.

And that's before Wall Street started playing their games.

We don't have a bunch of people who need to go to jail, we have a bunch of people who need to be put on their knees and shot in the back of the head.

Chas

Unfortunately some of the worst ones are already dead - see link in #11

did you wet yourself with excitement?

AZ is in big trouble. The construction industry has paid the bills and employed a huge % of the population. Without it, the foreclosures will continue at a record pace. I really can't see a way out of this mess.

It's a shame we can't kill 'em again in the new world...I understand that perpetual life is part of the criteria.

But I don't reckon that will stop us from busting their kneecaps with a tire iron, which I assume will result in a perpetual affliction.

One can only hope,

Chas

And it is an "utter mess":

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/c27463a0-1...#axzz1APp1FMVV

Some encouraging stats;

Total tax collected from the sale of guns and ammunition, in 2007 $287,836,000, in 2009 $452,582,000 so it seems the right wingers raising the gun confiscation scare are helping with the deficit.

I 2008 Sista Sarah's approval rating was 40% as of oct 2010 it was 22%, probably proving the old adage "T'is better to remain silent and have people think you a fool than to open your mouth and remove all doubt>"

Daily consumer spending dropped from $91 in 2008 to $62 in 2010.

Active militias rose from 43 in 2007 to 127 in 2009.

Sleep well.

The stats also fail to mention seasonal Christmas hiring that always happens this time of year no matter what.

The active militias actually tripled in two years?

I didn't know Morris Dees was running another fundraiser.

Chas

Wouldn't you say though, that 9.4% in December of 2010 is better than 9.9% unemployment in December of 2009. That should be comparing apples to apples shouldn't it?

Regards,

D-Ray

I'm not so sure that the figures aren't being manipulated, but something is better than nothing.

Chas

That's the average Chas, Altlantic Monthly has a chart showing that amongst degreed folks it is very low and amongst black males it is quite high. Much depends upon where you are in the pecking order.:rolleyes:

I can appreciate how they arrive at their figures, what I question is what they're using for data.

If you calculate in those who were dropped from the UE rolls for one reason or another, young people who would normally be entering the workforce but have moved back in with mom, under and part time employment, you wind up with a different picture.

I'm not questioning that we're down a half a point from last year, I'm questioning the baseline figures themselves.

Chas

Sorta doesn't matter IMHO. If the data is analysed in the same manner every month, the fact remains that unemployment went down 0.5%. Anyone who knows a thing about unemployment figures knows that there's a difference between structural unemployment, total unemployment and these figures. It's the trend in these figures that matter IMHO.

They also gave figures for the young people who moved back home, near as I recall the number tripled from summat like 23% to 70%.

All these numbers aside does anyone honestly believe that all these dumbass bills Boehner & Co. are proposing are going to put anyone back to work?

Chas, be careful what you ask for. Here is the most current unemployment data from the Bureau of Labor Standards. If you want other unemployment data, for example last year's, start hunting here.;) I have actually used BLS data for a few things, and it is very thorough.

Regards,

D-Ray

Not to worry as we have a new elite, no less a person than Alan Greenspan says so. Note that International bankers and wall street have recovered nicely. Last year hedge fund managers made a billion a piece - and were taxed at 15%. These people have become a nation unto themselvves as they walk of with 2/3rds of the pie and leave we peons to split the rest. Actually I guess we are lucky they left us as much as 1/3rd.

Why thank you Don, that's a little more like it.

Now they may be figures from the "lyin' goobermitt", but the government does have the most extensive database out there, and a benchmark has to be established from something.

And while a 1/2 point drop in UE is better than a sharp stick in the eye, I don't think it's time to break out the party hats just yet.

Concerning the economy, I'm beginning to grow cautiously optimistic. I actually got a couple of phone calls.

Now one of them was a wrong number, but batting .500 in a snowstorm ain't bad.

Now can you furnish me with the internals on TARP. As you've pointed out, most of it, most noticeably loans to the big banks, has almost been repaid.

I still don't understand how they've gone from being flat busted on their asses to rolling in the dough so quickly.

It's not like they have a money tree or anything.

Chas

PS: Don't get me wrong, if the Lizzards of Wall Street can pull another rabbit out of their ass and keep this house of cards from folding up, it's fine with me.

Wouldn't hurt if they were to work a little cheaper, but I understand that's the motivation for repayment in the 1st place.

Where do we find such men?

I know where we could put them, if only we had a decent bunco squad.

And unlike the town drunk, I would have no problem with charging them room and board for their stay at the hoosescow.

Besides, the town drunk bought his Sweet Lucy with his own money.

Chas

I don't think there are many fans of wall street around, except for those on its payroll, including many in Congress. I don't know of anyone who doesn't think the wall street types are overpaid, except for those on the wall street payroll.

I won't be jumping up and down until unemployment falls below 7%, but we probably have to wait until Obama's second term for that.:rolleyes:

Regards,

D-Ray

If this "New Elite" has its way that won't happen. We need to boost the top rate to 90% again.:mad:

No. So far all I've seen from them is a pathetic Kabuki dance. Well, to be fair they did protect a handfull of the ultra rich from a tax increase. Or loss of a tax cut........or whatever you want to call it.........I guess.

When the economy picks up, it'll be because people who have money have grown tired of sitting on it.

Dave

It's never really mattered much about who has passed what bill.

Unemployment cycles up and down and most likely always will.

It's probably a safe bet that LESS legislation equals LESS unemployment, but we are unlikely to return to a point where we have less legislation, so we'll just have to get used to it.

Also, it's ridiculous that everybody always bitches about the rich getting richer and the poor getting poorer. What in the world do thinks happens to the poor when the rich get poorer?