Obama is clueless as to why the economy isn't recovering:

Obama's Silver Lining?

By Jeffrey Folks

The August employment figures are dismal. Only 71,000 new jobs were created in the private sector in this, the beginning of the second year of economic recovery. At this rate, economists tell us, the unemployment rate will continue to rise indefinitely, and that is just what's happening. It is now 9.6%, up from 9.5 the previous month.

Not to worry-President Obama has detected a "silver lining" in these numbers. The private sector, he noted on Friday, "is creating jobs... just not enough." That's like saying the Cubs are getting hits, just not enough. Someday, though, they will get enough to win the pennant and even the World Series. As for the economy, at 71,000 jobs per month it will take 118 months, or almost 10 years, to win back the 8.4 million jobs that have been lost since the Obama recession began. Where exactly is the silver lining?

Maybe the silver lining is out there with the "green shoots" that Obama detected back in the spring of 2009. That was the same time he promised unemployment rates would not exceed 8% if his $862 billion stimulus bill was passed. The stimulus spending, he stated, would create 4 million new jobs. Instead 6 million jobs have been lost since he took office, and unemployment rates show no sign of declining. In fact, they are predicted to rise above 10% by the end of the year.

The White House, which always has a glib answer for everything, came out with an explanation of rising unemployment rates. Rates are rising, they say, because the economy is improving and more people are now seeking employment.

Unfortunately, that answer doesn't work. For one thing, it begs the question of why all those workers were so discouraged that they were not seeking employment to begin with. It was because Obama's handling of the economy was so bad that it did not even occur to them to look for a job. Now that a few more of them are climbing out of their moms' basements to go fill out applications, the question remains: where are the 4 million jobs that Obama promised? For that matter, where are the 16 million jobs created under President Reagan, and this from a much smaller population base? Where are the 52 consecutive months of economic expansion and 5 million jobs created under Obama's predecessor?

As Democrat Rep. Steny Hoyer put it, "We haven't had success. We've had progress." Well, actually, not much progress. In the second year of the Bush economic recovery (2004), the unemployment rate was 5.4%. It continued in the 5% range or below for most of the Bush presidency. There is a great probability, according to the best estimates, that Obama, when he is voted out in 2012, will leave office with an unemployment rate above 9%. Not only that, the average unemployment rate for the four years of his presidency will almost certainly stand at above 9%. That is the worst showing since Herbert Hoover.

Oddly enough, Obama's highly educated squad of advisors has failed to identify the chief cause of unemployment: lack of growth in the economy. In fact, the word "growth" is noticeably absent in Obama's speeches. Instead, there is a great deal in his addresses about "fairness," "subsidies," "stimulus," and "benefits." There is nothing about the sort of growth that stems from private investment based on the worthy expectation of profit. As Obama put it in one of the most sophomoric pronouncements in presidential history: "Now is not the time" for profits.

Has the President ever considered the fact that his relentless campaign against profits might have something to do with the hesitancy of businesses to invest and expand? Business is now faced with enormous tax hikes, burdensome healthcare mandates, unrealistic environmental restrictions, an explosion of legal actions on the part of trial lawyers and our own government, and increased union organizing spurred on by Obama appointments to the Labor Relations Board and other agencies. With all this, how can the President pretend that his policies have nothing to do with the failed recovery?

As Thomas Donlan wrote in a recent issue of Barron's, those "companies that are successful in international competition" are among the prime targets of Obama's attack on business. Why? Because names like Intel, IBM, Exxon Mobil, and Bank of America are the most visible symbols of American capitalism. By undermining our great corporations and regulating their profits, Obama is shifting power from the free market to government.

It is ironic that Obama expects those same corporations to bail him out by investing more, even as he demonizes the private sector for its "evil" profit motive. Earlier this summer at a meeting of the Business Roundtable, a group of leading CEOs from America's largest companies, Verizon CEO Ivan Seidenberg stated that Obama's policies had "reached a point where the negative effects ... are simply too significant to ignore." Roundtable president John Castellani listed a number of specific measures that could be taken to promote growth, including lowering of corporate taxes and reducing specific regulations, including provisions of the recently passed financial reform bill. Obama has taken action on none of these.

How do you judge a president who spends his first two years in office trashing private enterprise and then blames everyone but himself for the economic failure that results? Maybe Obama, who wants the EPA to put letter grades on vehicles (A+ to D-), should assign a grade to his own handling of the economy. Or maybe we should assign one for him. In the topsy-turvy manner in which he sees the world, he would surely assign himself an A+.

Yep, been saying the same thing for months now. Ya can't bite the hand that feeds ya, and that's what this administration and this congress has done. Insulted, assaulted, assailed, blamed, threatened, and cursed the ONLY group that can provide real jobs.
Business and industry.

To all the people who like to talk about the "Bush deficit" and so on...

Obama Added More to National Debt in First 19 Months Than All Presidents from Washington Through Reagan Combined, Says Gov’t Data

quote Originally posted by maryjane: Yep, been saying the same thing for months now. Ya can't bite the hand that feeds ya, and that's what this administration and this congress has done. Insulted, assaulted, assailed, blamed, threatened, and cursed the ONLY group that can provide real jobs. Business and industry.

It seams like the whole country is under there desks in the fetal position, waiting for the white flash, followed by the heat wave the will strip the closes from their bodies.

LOL...Obama needs a parrot

Hitler bunker parody of the foreclosure fraud...

Dollar fall sparks stability warnings

Articles about the Fed wanting to create inflation, thinking it will help the economy and the job market:

Bernanke sees case for more Federal Reserve easing

Two Fed officials favor aggressive easing options

Has The Fed run out of ideas? They want to create inflation? What???

Federal Reserve urged to act on economy

A senior member of the Federal Reserve has warned that the US economy is in a “liquidity trap” and signalled support for more action to boost the recovery.

Charles Evans, president of the Chicago Fed, said that “in my opinion, much more policy accommodation is appropriate today” because “the US economy is best described as being in a bona fide liquidity trap”, a point where ultra-low interest rates and high savings rates conspire to make monetary policy ineffective.

Speaking in Boston on Saturday, he said the Fed should consider using a temporary target for the level of prices instead of the rate of inflation in order to drag the economy out the trap by convincing businesses and consumers to stop saving and start investing and spending.

Such a move would be in addition to a fresh asset purchase programme, or quantitative easing, now under consideration.

“I think there are special circumstances when price-level targeting would be a helpful complement to our current and prospective strategies,” Mr Evans said.

A target for prices is one way the Fed could try to persuade the public that inflation will recover in future and thereby stimulate the economy.

But many Fed officials are not yet persuaded that a price level target makes sense. In an interview last week with the Financial Times, James Bullard, the president of the St Louis Fed, said he was “sympathetic” to the idea of a price level target but that “I don’t think we’re going to go in that direction any time soon”.

In the price targeting that Mr Evans described, the Fed would promise to generate enough extra inflation to make the price level the same as if prices had risen by 2 per cent a year since December 2007, which was the peak of the last business cycle according to the National Bureau of Economic Research. As soon as the Fed reached that goal it would abandon the price level target and go back to targeting inflation of about 2 per cent a year.

The Fed has an implicit inflation goal of 2 per cent but has never formalised it.

Ben Bernanke, Fed chairman, last week left open the option of using communication to promise that the Fed would keep interest rates lower for longer, but he did not refer to a price level target.

Citi: Central Banks Are Going To Start Dumping Dollars In The Coming Weeks

GLOBAL ECONOMY-Obama returns fire after China slams Fed's move

Mon Nov 8, 2010 8:41am EST
* Obama says U.S. low growth or no growth danger to world

* China says U.S being irresponsible over QE

* Russia says G20 should have been consulted by Fed

* Trichet: c.bankers insist no currency weakening sought

(Adds Trichet, Geithner)

By Patricia Zengerle and Krittivas Mukherjee

NEW DELHI, Nov 8 (Reuters) - U.S. President Barack Obama defended the Federal Reserve's policy of printing dollars on Monday after China and Russia stepped up criticism ahead of this week's Group of 20 meeting.

The G20 summit has been pitched as a chance for leaders of the countries that account for 85 percent of world output to prevent a currency row escalating into a rush to protectionism that could imperil the global recovery. [ID:nSGE6A703T]

But there is little sign of consensus.

The summit has been overshadowed by disagreements over the U.S. Federal Reserve's quantitative easing (QE) policy under which it will print money to buy $600 billion of government bonds, a move that could depress the dollar and cause a potentially destabilising flow of money into emerging economies.

"I will say that the Fed's mandate, my mandate, is to grow our economy. And that's not just good for the United States, that's good for the world as a whole," Obama said during a trip to India.

"And the worst thing that could happen to the world economy, not just ours, is if we end up being stuck with no growth or very limited growth," he said.

European Central Bank President Jean-Claude Trichet said all participants at a meeting of the world's central bankers in Basel, Switzerland had insisted they were not pursuing weak currency policies.

"We're attached to avoiding excessive volatility. It's very counterproductive for global growth and global stability," he told a news conference.

Washington has frequently criticised China, saying it deliberately undervalues its currency to boost exports.

China says the United States, via the Fed, is engaged in the same thing that it stands accused of, and some emerging nations have already acted to curb their currencies' rise.

Resentment abroad stems from worry that Fed pump-priming will hasten the U.S. dollar's slide and cause their currencies to shoot up in value, setting the stage for asset bubbles and making a future burst of inflation more likely.

"As a major reserve currency issuer, for the United States to launch a second round of quantitative easing at this time, we feel that it did not recognise its responsibility to stabilise global markets and did not think about the impact of excessive liquidity on emerging markets," Chinese Finance Vice Minister Zhu Guangyao said on Monday. [ID:nTOE6A705G]

The Fed's quantitative easing policy was unveiled last week to jeers from emerging market powerhouses from Latin America to Asia. Russia renewed its assault on Monday. [ID:nTOE6A300V]

"Russia's president will insist .... that such actions are taken with preliminary consultations with other members of the global economy," said Arkady Dvorkovich, a Russian official who is preparing the country's position in Seoul. [ID:nLDE6A70V6]

Bank of Japan Deputy Governor Hirohide Yamaguchi said on Monday that it too was ready to boost its asset-buying scheme if it saw clear signs of a downturn. Worth 5 trillion yen ($62 billion), it is so far just a tenth the size of the Fed's. [ID:nTOE6A700Y]

The Food Inflation Nightmare Is About To Hit 40% Of The World's Population

I think this is a BAD sign for the Dollar:

China, Russia quit dollar

Greenspan Says Government ‘Activism’ Hampering U.S. Recovery
http://www.bloomberg.com/ne...ng-u-s-recovery.html

quote Former Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan said a surge in U.S. government “activism,” including fiscal stimulus, housing subsidies and new regulations, is holding back the economic recovery. Increased bond issuance by the Treasury Department crowds out borrowers with the weakest credit ratings, Greenspan said in an article in International Finance, published on the Web today. At least half of the shortfall in companies’ capital spending “can be explained by the shock of vastly greater government- created uncertainties embedded in the competitive, regulatory and financial environments” since the failure of Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc. (LEHMQ) in 2008, Greenspan said. Greenspan’s conclusions fit with his long-held free-market ideology and may aid Republican lawmakers who argue that cutting federal spending now will help spur job growth. Critics including members of the Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission have said Greenspan’s failure to regulate the mortgage market last decade helped fuel the housing bubble whose bursting precipitated the financial crisis. “Much intervention turns out to hobble markets rather than enhancing them,” said Greenspan, 84, who was appointed Fed chairman by Republican President Ronald Reagan in 1987 and served until 2006. “Any withdrawal of action to allow the economy to heal could restore some, or much, of the dynamic of the pre-crisis decade, without its imbalances.”

No posts on the drop in the unemployment rate (running and ducking for cover!)???

The unemployment rate is actually higher than what the government says it is. They only track those that are collecting unemployment benefits. If you add all the ones who ran out of benefits, and still aren't employed, the rate is closer to 20%.

THIS is the official policy of the United States Government? Really? What the F***?

US backing for world currency stuns markets

Right now, because of all the money printing we have been doing, our money is becoming basically worthless. Pretty soon we may be dealing in Chinese yuan as the new world currency.

This can't be a good sign...

March Madness: U.S. Gov't Spent More Than Eight Times Its Monthly Revenue

http://www.reuters.com/arti...dUSTRE7335BY20110404

So realistically... What happens after we hit the ceiling?

quote Originally posted by Silentassassin185: http://www.reuters.com/arti...dUSTRE7335BY20110404 So realistically... What happens after we hit the ceiling?

The government either stops deficit spending or keeps raising the ceiling and continues to borrow.

Prepare for Double Dip.

http://tycoonreport.tycoonr...ces-kill-the-economy

http://www.hurriyetdailynew...17-crisis-2011-04-03

http://www.politico.com/new...ries/0311/52191.html

http://www.wibw.com/nationa...e_dip_118936474.html

http://seekingalpha.com/art...-is-nowhere-in-sight

http://loanrateupdate.com/m...ecovery-2-years-away

http://www.inman.com/news/2...ts-expect-double-dip

quote Originally posted by fierobear: The government either stops deficit spending or keeps raising the ceiling and continues to borrow.

But neither side is willing to give it seems. Republicans want to cut spending (makes sense), Democrats want to raise the limit (this just seems counter productive) so if we get to the deadline and nothing changes it's not like there is some easy button to hit is there?

On a side note I read somewhere today (Link) that Obama and whoever runs against him could spend between 2-3 billion campaigning for the 2012 elections. I would vote for the guy that puts his 2 billion towards the national debt.

EDIT:to add link

[This message has been edited by Silentassassin185 (edited 04-05-2011).]

quote Originally posted by Silentassassin185: But neither side is willing to give it seems. Republicans want to cut spending (makes sense), Democrats want to raise the limit (this just seems counter productive) so if we get to the deadline and nothing changes it's not like there is some easy button to hit is there?

More details on the Republican plan: http://www.theblaze.com/sto...govt-shutdown-looms/

quote On a side note I read somewhere today (Link) that Obama and whoever runs against him could spend between 2-3 billion campaigning for the 2012 elections. I would vote for the guy that puts his 2 billion towards the national debt. EDIT:to add link

I've heard that the Obama campaign plans to spend $1 billion. Yeah, noting says "grass roots" like a $1 billion campaign fund.

US deficit up 15.7% in first half of fiscal 2011

Some guy, ummm I forget his name, on tv has been telling us these things for years. Did we listen? Did we heed his warning?

No, we just called him an idiot and elected the Obamacrats. Now, NO ONE has the courage to stop the train wreck.

Oh, he wasn't on Feaux News then either.

Hmmm...gee, isn't that funny. Two of the guys I've been telling people to listen to, Glenn Beck and Peter Schiff.

quote Originally posted by texasfiero: Some guy, ummm I forget his name, on tv has been telling us these things for years. Did we listen? Did we heed his warning? No, we just called him an idiot and elected the Obamacrats. Now, NO ONE has the courage to stop the train wreck. Oh, he wasn't on Feaux News then either.

So when Beck was on the "leftest" channels selling his doomsday prophecies you watched and believed?? Cool.

And you expected the American public to re-elect the Republicans? Why do you think there was such a backlash? IMO warranted or not people voted overwhelmingly for Democrats in the 2008 election because of what a mess things were in.

You guys did notice that one of the interviewees mentioned revenue generators like (I better whisper this) tax hikes, along with spending cuts correct?

[This message has been edited by newf (edited 04-13-2011).]

quote Originally posted by newf: So when Beck was on the "leftest" channels selling his doomsday prophecies you watched and believed?? Cool.

It's not the CHANNEL, it's the MESSAGE, you moron.

quote And you expected the American public to re-elect the Republicans? Why do you think there was such a backlash? IMO warranted or not people voted overwhelmingly for Democrats in the 2008 election because of what a mess things were in.

More proof that the average voter has no goddamn idea how the economy really works, and that government CAN'T fix it.

quote You guys did notice that one of the interviewees mentioned revenue generators like (I better whisper this) tax hikes, along with spending cuts correct?

Did YOU notice they said it would be IMPOSSIBLE to tax people enough to pay for all that stuff?

Bitter much?

And yeah I did notice they said that, in fact that's why I said tax hikes AND spending cuts.

[This message has been edited by newf (edited 04-13-2011).]

quote Originally posted by newf: Bitter much?

No better way to deal with a troll like yourself.

quote Originally posted by fierobear: No better way to deal with a troll like yourself.

hahahahaha clearly that's what I was doing. You might want to look that word up, in fact I think there is a thread on it here.

quote Originally posted by newf: hahahahaha clearly that's what I was doing. You might want to look that word up, in fact I think there is a thread on it here.

Maybe they had you in mind when they started it?

quote Originally posted by fierobear: Maybe they had you in mind when they started it?

Really? You think so? Please point out how I'm being a troll.

quote Originally posted by newf: Really? You think so? Please point out how I'm being a troll.

How about this?

quote Originally posted by newf: So when Beck was on the "leftest" channels selling his doomsday prophecies you watched and believed?? Cool. And you expected the American public to re-elect the Republicans? Why do you think there was such a backlash? IMO warranted or not people voted overwhelmingly for Democrats in the 2008 election because of what a mess things were in. You guys did notice that one of the interviewees mentioned revenue generators like (I better whisper this) tax hikes, along with spending cuts correct?

You are too blinded by your leftist ideology to see that what Glenn and his guests were saying is now coming true. What he has said about the economic crisis in Europe coming here is now happening and yet you can't or WON'T see it.

Did you overlook the Republicans being thrown out of office in 2006? Are you not aware of the loss in 2008? Have you not heard the turmoil that the recent cave-in over the most recent CR has caused?

Do you not see or understand that Obama's agenda will just worsen the situation? Are liberals throwing Democrats out of office the way conservatives do?

And YOU charge others as trolls?

WOW!

quote Originally posted by texasfiero: You are too blinded by your leftist ideology to see that what Glenn and his guests were saying is now coming true. What he has said about the economic crisis in Europe coming here is now happening and yet you can't or WON'T see it. Did you overlook the Republicans being thrown out of office in 2006? Are you not aware of the loss in 2008? Have you not heard the turmoil that the recent cave-in over the most recent CR has caused? Do you not see or understand that Obama's agenda will just worsen the situation? Are liberals throwing Democrats out of office the way conservatives do? And YOU charge others as trolls? WOW!

Ummmm do you know what a troll is? Please explain how my post is trolling in anyway.

Oh and also point out where I charged others as being trolls.


I actually took the time to watch your video links and commented on what I saw, just because my opinion doesn't agree with yours doesn't mean I am wrong or being a troll it just means I have a differing point of view. I'm sorry if it offends you that not everyone believes what you do but I can't help that.

[This message has been edited by newf (edited 04-13-2011).]

quote Originally posted by carnut122: No posts on the drop in the unemployment rate (running and ducking for cover!)???

You may want to read this.

quote Early this month Labor reported that 216,000 new jobs were created in March. It was better than Wall Street expected. But the figure included 117,000 jobs that the department thinks, but can't prove, were created by newly formed companies that might not even exist. In fact, the department is getting so optimistic about the labor market that it increased this imaginary job count from just 81,000 in March, 2010. Read more: http://www.nypost.com/p/new...EK48GL#ixzz1JQ57iN4C