digg

Join DiggAbout

Discover the best of the web!
Learn more about Digg by taking the tour.

America Losing Faith in Economy: Confidence Hits 5-Year Low

nuwireinvestor.com — The lack of confidence in the flagging economy has been spurred on by rising gas and food prices and weakening job prospects. As a result, "a widely watched measure of consumer sentiment [reached] a five-year low, a private research group said Tuesday," according to the AP.

Bury
show profanity settings
expand all
  • Qong, on 04/30/2008, -16/+20Good article, though I don't think that we're in that much trouble personally.
    • PeppermintPig, on 04/30/2008, -5/+19Unchecked overgrowth of government and a Federal Reserve enabling corruption in the financial sector... I suppose it COULD be worse, but at what point is anybody willing to consider the hardship that does not effect them may soon follow onto themselves. As they say, the difference between a recession and a depression is...
      • Qong, on 05/01/2008, -3/+1I agree that the rampant growth of government in recent years is a huge problem that will have to be dealt with, and not by spending even more, like most politicians want to do.

        As for the Fed enabling corruption in the financial sector, I'm not sure what exactly you are referring to. I work in the financial sector and I don't know of anything overtly corrupt happening, especially something allowed by the Fed. With that said, of course there is some level of corruption, there is corruption in every sector.

        So yes, there are problems. But it's not the end of the world, it's not even an economic recession at this point.
        • boot20, on 05/01/2008, -0/+4I have two words for you about financial sector corruption:
          Bear Stearns
    • BassMastr, on 04/30/2008, -7/+8You are exctly right...those same talking heads who went around tellling everyone that AL-Q was going to kill us all also went out of their way to make everyone thought the economy around us is going to collapse (good news doesn't get good ratings.) and here today we find out that we aren't even going to have a recession. Just like people need to educate themselves about world events, they must also take full resposiblity for doing their own research on the economy. It's too bad that media outlets have become more worried about finances than ethics...(I guess that's no different than any other industry.)
      • Aeaus, on 04/30/2008, -3/+10Sanity, reason, no fear mongering, only redeeming factor is hate of the MSM. 40% Chance of being buried.
        • sgiffy, on 04/30/2008, -8/+2Also an absence of RonPaul fellating. Buriage is eminent.
      • relic180, on 04/30/2008, -4/+5Well, actually the people that originally told us Al-Q was going to kill us are telling us the economy is fine. Although I do agree that the media are fear mongering whores, latching onto any negative story they can get their hands on.
        I would want to know where you've heard or read that "we aren't even going to have a recession"... because the last I heard, it was still very hotly debated and everybody was waiting to see how the next two quarters pan out.
        Nobody, however, is debating that the economic growth is essentially nil, the only debates are over whether it's actually negative or not. Either way, it's not a happy time for the U.S. economy.
        • BassMastr, on 04/30/2008, -5/+4The econ actually grew last quarter...not by much...but no recesssion unless the next two quarters shrink. (which is highly unlikely.)

          http://biz.yahoo.com/ap/080430/economy.html
          • boot20, on 05/01/2008, -0/+2Nobody argues that, but with all the issues and HUGE amounts of national debt (both private and government held), we're in deep sh*t. Arguing over semantics doesn't change the issue that the economy is spiraling in the crapper.
          • kemp34, on 05/01/2008, -0/+2You cannot trust the government GDP figures at this point. They are terrible in their measurements.
        • Qong, on 05/01/2008, -2/+1When did the same people telling us that the economy is fine say anything about Al-Qaeda, ever?

          Economists talk about the Economy. If you are listening to other people, people that have absolutely no idea what is going with the economy in reality, such as politicians, then there's no wonder you are confusing and associating people that publicly talk about Al-Qaeda and the US Economy at the same time.

          As for the growth issue: Growth comes and goes. An economy has to continue to develop and advance to grow, they do this through economic freedom and the ingenuity of the people, not through governmental regulation. Knowing this, we can almost immediately void the opinions of most politicians on our economy.
          • 11oops, on 05/01/2008, -0/+2Bush has been saying for months that the economy is fine. 'It's just a little slowdown.' 'Gas is how much?'
    • sgiffy, on 04/30/2008, -4/+4I agree. At worst we are looking at what Japan faced int he 90's. Not good by a long shot, but certainly not catastrophic. Personally I think we have couple years of slow growth and restricted credit as we climb out of of current over-indebtedness. The good thing is that we have plenty of economic activity that will allow us to do this without to much pain.
      • 11oops, on 04/30/2008, -4/+4And just how will we grow out of our indebtedness (government or consumer)? Government is spending more while politicians promise tax cuts, and an American's dollar buys less of the essentials they need to survive but wages aren't rising accordingly?
        • MaxPayne3476, on 05/01/2008, -2/+2there, is little reason to pay back our debt. In essence 25% of our debt is external - meaning we owe it to foreign nations. What does this mean? Basically that those nations who hold our debt NEED to keep us afloat, or else we repay them in inflated currency. The other 75% is Internal Debt, money WE owe ourselves. Just a transfer of money from one American to another or one agency to the next.
          • boot20, on 05/01/2008, -0/+2So do you pay your Visa with your Mastercard too?
      • Qong, on 05/01/2008, -2/+1I don't see our economy being in a similar situation as Japan was in the early 90's. And I'm fairly certain that credit will pick up for individuals as well, whether that is sustainable or a good thing is another story, but as long as we continue to innovate and progress economically things will be fine. And personally, I don't see a lack of innovation and work ethic in the American economy.
  • EA2323, on 04/30/2008, -6/+22It's hard to say how bad things are going to get, but I certainly don't feel comfortable when I'm paying $4 a gallon for gas. My last fill up cost almost $80!
    • MichaelCo, on 04/30/2008, -1/+11In Australia, we are currently paying around $1.55 per liter which is $5.86 per gallon!! The last time we paid $4 per gallon was probably 2-3 years ago. My 2 cars cost around $200 to fill and many are now feeling that driving a car has become unsustainable for their incomes. I try to drive as little as possible. I put $15 in this morning and it got me around 35 miles which works out to an astounding $1.50+ per mile
      • relic180, on 04/30/2008, -0/+11God damn, you mind as well catch a cab to work every day. At least you'll save on insurance.
      • 11oops, on 04/30/2008, -0/+8Your fuel tax is also 1.44 per gallon, much higher than hours. Ouch... we thought we had it bad.
    • BassMastr, on 04/30/2008, -1/+27That's why the rest of the world has much better public transportation systems than we do here in the US. They have been paying these prices for years...
      • Dumbledorito, on 04/30/2008, -1/+15The U.S. has the additional disadvantage of being more spread out, but yeah, there's really a big void in public transport in most major cities.
      • MaxPayne3476, on 05/01/2008, -1/+4;) Actually it might be Suburbia that decreases our public transportation infrastructure. Oh, and NYC actually was one of the top of public transportation ranked.
    • dshPls, on 04/30/2008, -1/+10Shoulda got a smaller car, it's $40 to fill up for me, and I go about 450 miles on a tank.
      • BadseedJR, on 04/30/2008, -8/+1I have a small SUV with a V6 and I still pay about 65 bucks per tank. I bought a second car just for commuting!
      • farfegnugen, on 05/01/2008, -0/+3What car do you have? My Jetta costs about $40 to fill up but I only get 200 miles on a tank. I'm definitely buying a different car once I'm out of college... something that gets more than 20 mpg.
        • BadseedJR, on 05/01/2008, -0/+5There's something wrong with your jetta if you are only getting 20mpg.
    • analogkid01, on 04/30/2008, -1/+10wtf do you drive?? No sympathy.
    • swoopdog, on 04/30/2008, -2/+7don't drive

      also: waaaaahhh
    • tucsonsun13, on 04/30/2008, -2/+4Sell your Expedition or whatever wana-be-off-road SUV you drive.
    • itsthemechanic, on 04/30/2008, -1/+2We pay close to $10 a gallon here in Germany. The average fillup for our car costs about 80 euro ($130). QQ more.
    • Easirok, on 05/01/2008, -2/+0A 20-gallon tank? Hey douchebag, get a smaller vehicle.
  • seth123qq, on 04/30/2008, -23/+33Ron Paul was right!!
    unfortunately that doesn't surprise me... he is often right i just wish more people listened
    • sgiffy, on 04/30/2008, -9/+23When you continually predict the inevitable next phase of the business cycle your going to be right at some point. Kind of like predicting the whole summer that eventually temperatures will come down.
      • relic180, on 04/30/2008, -8/+5So you're basically saying that he was right, and you still think he's full of *****?
        Were any of the major party candidates also predicting this? Nope. Does that mean they didn't know? Not really, it just means they don't give a ***** since they'll all be riding whatever gravytrain comes around regardless of what the rest of us have to go through.
        • sgiffy, on 04/30/2008, -5/+10lol, one would have same track record constantly predicting economic growth. Though I guess if he ever was elected president, or if anyone in congress took him seriously his predictions of complete catastrophe would come true pretty ***** quickly.
      • kaelyiesta, on 04/30/2008, -6/+5He was not predicting the next business cycle. He was arguing that the cycle itself is a product of our current economic system and that unsustainable bubble burst effect was more harmful than not(with the exception of the people in control of our economic system who could profit from it and avoid the fallout). Austrian economic theory has identified this cycle a long time ago. It's nothing new. What is important is the argument of whether or not such a model right. Should economy be influenced by certain groups how ever they want? Does it help everyone or some more than others? Is it sustainable? These are the issues that Ron Paul (and many other economists) are really addressing. The whole cyclical thing isn't the issue.
        • sgiffy, on 05/01/2008, -2/+2But he is wrong on that. Austrian economics is a discredited and rather useless school of economics that has offered nothing of any real substance.

          Pure free markets do not work. The US and many other nations tried them and they resulted in failure. Hence the move toward central banking.
        • kemp34, on 05/01/2008, -1/+1Sgiffy you are so wrong bud. Sorry. No one has disproven von Mises' arguments. He has been spot on. The only thing making you think you're right is that you go based on herd beliefs.
    • onetimer, on 04/30/2008, -8/+10Yes, congratulations. He's literally been predicting an "immanent economic recession" for the last 20+ YEARS, and now it's finally happening. he must be some kind of genius. Never mind the fact that plenty of REAL economists were predicting this before it happened, but much closer to the time it happened.

      I suppose even a broken clock is right twice a day. Though I can't say he'll ever be right with this stance against evolution...
      • aeoo, on 05/01/2008, -0/+3Just because Ron Paul is better than McCain doesn't mean he's a genius. I don't understand why people can't get that?
        • seth123qq, on 05/01/2008, -1/+2well finally some one had the nuts to say it. and just because he doent believe in evolution it wont make him a bad political leader (although i am a strong believer in evolution my self) his whole stance on government represents a lot of things but one of them is to not get his personal beliefs into his politics like the US has seen so many times before
    • mike17032, on 04/30/2008, -4/+7My broken watch is right a whole lot more often than old paul is.
  • lpxxfaintxx2, on 04/30/2008, -10/+42Open your eyes, Americans. This is just unfair, especially for young adults and teens. Why must we pay for stupid things the generation before us have done?
    • BassMastr, on 04/30/2008, -7/+6And generations after us will have to pay for our mistakes...thats the way it works. You know we also get the benefits of the things they worked for...
    • BassMastr, on 04/30/2008, -8/+9That's a perfect representation of today's youth... We want all the benefits, but none of the draw backs...and we don't want to work for it!
    • ekfritz, on 04/30/2008, -1/+2That's the way it works all over the world. Get over it.
    • aeoo, on 05/01/2008, -0/+2Welcome to the culture of greed. If you want it to be any different, then start talking negatively about greed to your friends and family. Promote the virtues of contentment and moderate consumption that lies comfortably within one's means (i.e., no debt-financed consumption and no leveraged investments). It's an issue of culture. If you don't like it, then, first, culture yourself differently, and, second, spread your culture by gently discussing things when the opportunity presents itself and by never giving an apologetic nod to greed.
  • louiebaur, on 04/30/2008, -2/+3Yea I am one of them for sure
  • StingingNettle, on 04/30/2008, -8/+23So you have to cut back. OK you have to cut back a lot. But does that really mean you will be less happy? Maybe a more simple life will be good for the soul.
    • PeppermintPig, on 04/30/2008, -0/+12Appreciating the difficulties of life is besides the point that certain people are able to benefit greatly from the hardship that they're creating for others here. If the criminals and instigators cannot be deposed, then the same difficulties will be imposed on you by the same people, even as you try to live leaner.
      • relic180, on 04/30/2008, -2/+4I agree that there should be equal focus on dealing with the profiteers of our current economic situation, but there is also something to be said for trying to remove yourself, somewhat, from materialistic needs.
        • PeppermintPig, on 04/30/2008, -1/+1Understand your point, though I don't think materialism is the antithesis of living a happy life. It's rather the accumulation of stuff and emotional attachment to these things. It is possible to live with fewer 'materialistic desires' superfluous of your life essentials, and still live a prosperous life with economic liberty ( have lots of cash ). We cannot escape the materialistic world, but we can certainly put the worth of things into perspective. All action, ultimately, is geared towards pleasing other people, not material possessions.
      • aeoo, on 05/01/2008, -0/+1But the hardship is a result of overconsumption. So when overconsumption is brought back in check, you call that "hardship"? So, if I am used to a life-style where I buy 2 console games a week and now I can only afford 1, that's hardship? Sorry.

        Now, I know many individuals will truly suffer and that the bastard corps will profiteer greatly. I agree with you in that sense. But as a society we are guilty of overconsumption, and as a society we don't have a leg to stand on talking about hardship.

        It's like the hardship of heroin withdrawals. Where's the justice? Damn heroin sellers are making a killing.... Heroin dealers sure are bastards, but that's not all. There are some other bastards in that picture too... Let's not forget them.
    • dafunkmonster, on 04/30/2008, -3/+1Hippie.
    • MtheoryX, on 04/30/2008, -1/+8I'd really prefer to make the choice for myself to lead a simpler life, rather than be forced into it by a ***** economic situation.

      What would be better for the soul? Choosing and realizing that you really don't need things, or being so dirt poor that you can't get those things, even if you wanted to?
      • aeoo, on 05/01/2008, -1/+1> I'd really prefer to make the choice for myself to lead a simpler life

        I prefer to float in the air, personally. It's too bad there is gravity on this planet for now. I guess I have to deal with it then.
  • MichaelCo, on 04/30/2008, -8/+17$515 Billion (and counting) spent on the War on Iraq. If it continues at this rate, it'll ultimately be disastrous for the US economy and surely the war is having a real negative effect on people even if it is only subconscious at this stage which is naturally contributing further to this low consumer sentiment. At the very least, the war can surely not be argued as producing any positive consumer sentiment. And did I mention $515 Billion and counting?
    • Picaroon, on 04/30/2008, -5/+3Do you have some sort of evidence behind what you just said? Iraq is one of our cheapest wars in history by percentage of GDP. And all that money doesn't just disappear into thin air (assuming that the ineptitude of the government and their contractors don't lose it). It gets put back into the economy through manufacturing, purchasing of raw goods, etc.
      • MtheoryX, on 04/30/2008, -1/+4No, not all of the money disappears into thin air.

        Plenty of it disappears into the pockets of stake holders in the military industrial complex.
        • Picaroon, on 04/30/2008, -0/+1Oh, you mean money that gets invested in the economy, paid to workers, etc?
          You guys aren't really giving any arguments for your case.
    • dafunkmonster, on 04/30/2008, -2/+5How much of that $515 billion goes into military salaries?

      And given that the US isn't a communist nation, how is government money ill-spent going to kill the economy? You should probably explain the logic behind that...
      • geneticlone, on 04/30/2008, -2/+5@How much of that $515 billion goes into military salaries?
        Well my "GUESS" is probably not a lot at all. After reading some of the military veterans blogs they seem to be mad about the lack of money they are getting.

        Also we are pretty damn close to being a communist nation according to many people who experienced a direct affects from communism. Spending money on the war might not be "really" hurting us today but someone will have to pay that money back that we loaned eventually and that will hurt them when they get the check...
      • bdbr, on 04/30/2008, -0/+3Not just military salaries, but a LOT of US government contractors. It'd be interesting to see how much of that money is really being shipped out of the country, and how much is being paid to US companies. Surely there are better ways to spend money, but we don't need to make it sound as if every dollar goes into thin air.
      • Qong, on 05/01/2008, -0/+1He's ignorant. There is no logic behind his argument.
    • woofers07, on 04/30/2008, -0/+1Here's some math for you, lets take half of that, roughly 250 Billion minus salaries and other expenses and whatever, divide that by our 400 million population = more than $500,000 per person, sure seems that even 1% ($5,000 per person) of that would stimulate the economy a hell of a lot more than the weak ass $600 per person.
    • wojtyk, on 05/02/2008, -0/+0$3.1 Trillion (and counting) spent on Social Security from 2003 til now (duration of Iraq war). And that's ONE social program. The Iraq War is a pittance compared to what we blow on failing, ill-advised ponzi schemes and other socialist crap like medicare/medicaid that has achieved next to nothing (what is the current state of american healthcare? that's what I thought). And did I mention $3.1 Trillion and counting?
  • foxhaze, on 04/30/2008, -25/+9***** YOU, America! YOU HAD YOUR CHANCE. His name was RON PAUL.
    • sgiffy, on 04/30/2008, -7/+9If you mean a chance to return to the lovely pre-fed era where the economy bounced around between 20% deflation and 20% inflation with a bank run thrown in every decade or so for good measure, then yeah, I guess we had that chance. I'm kind of glad we missed it.
      • relic180, on 04/30/2008, -2/+5Yup. That's right. Because implementing policies that help protect us from corporate exploitation is the same thing as creating an unstable market. By the way, we essentially have zero direct control over the market, so there's no way for anybody to "return" us anywhere.
        • sgiffy, on 04/30/2008, -1/+5Not true. Through rate policy, market transactions, and reserve rates the Fed has a good deal of control. Abolishing the Fed destroys those tools and take us back to the fun times of the 18th and 19th centuries. Restricting the Fed would give us the fun times of the first part of this century. There is a reason the last 50 years have been among the most economically stable for any country in history and a good part of that reason is the Fed.
          • relic180, on 04/30/2008, -4/+1influence is not the same as control. And the tools they use to influence the market are, themselves, restricted by other factors. So you see, they have some influence but only to the extent that those other factors allow them to.

            And for the record, "abolishing the fed destroys those tools, etc, etc..." is a slippery slope fallacy that I don't need to waste time responding to. There are plenty of ways to handle an economy that don't involve private control of our currency, and don't result in catastrophy.
          • sgiffy, on 04/30/2008, -0/+4None that we have come up with yet. Keeping the control of those tools outside the political process is one of the strengths of the fed. They can do things like prevent Bear Stearns from bringing down the whole economy. Other than a central bank with the ability to engage in the actions that the Fed can in engage in, I'm not sure who you implement a nation wide effective monetary policy.

            We can debate the semantics of influence vs control, but the fact is that the actions by the Fed have a direct affect on the economy. Over the past 50 years that affect has been overwhelmingly positive.
          • relic180, on 04/30/2008, -4/+1"Other than a central bank with the ability to engage in the actions that the Fed can in engage in, I'm not sure who you implement a nation wide effective monetary policy."

            Well for the time being, I would want a central bank with the ability to engage in the actions that the Fed can in engage in, to handle it. I simply want private interests the ***** out of it.
          • sgiffy, on 04/30/2008, -0/+4If not the current people then who? You have a board appointed by the president and shareholders(with little power) representing the industry the Fed is involved with. Congress can intercede whenever they want, but the decision making process is generally not in the hands of politicians. The bank is domestically owned and its actions don't directly profit anyone as the dividend it pays is pretty small.

            Most of the critiques I've heard about the Fed are nonsensical conspiracies involving the government paying it interest (its refunded), foreign ownership(nope), or just general misunderstandings of inflation, debt, etc.
          • relic180, on 04/30/2008, -4/+1"If not the current people then who?"

            Private organizations existing in a capitalist economy always devolve into mindless profit machines. This isn't really disputed, and some who are completely in love with capitalism actually enjoy this aspect of it. So it stands to reason that private interests who are directly involved in monetary policy will trend toward profit maximizing behaviors that, among other things, minimize loss by moving it away from the private interest. What's outside of the private interest? The taxpayer. At which point we would only be arguing about how much control congress has over this private interest. Since congress has requested a complete audit of Fed activities and status on multiple occasions, and the Fed has (within their legal right) repeatedly declined, I would think they do not have much.

            Also I don't really understand how inflation or debt related issues would even enter in to this, as we seem to agree on the actions available to this hypothetical organization.
          • sgiffy, on 04/30/2008, -2/+2The GAO audits the Fed all the time. Some have tried to change the way the audits are done, and it has been defeated by congress. I am not aware of legislation actually being passed and then ignored by the Fed. Congress could abolish the Fed tomorrow if they wanted. Hell, RonPaul tries and fails every year.

            You can say taxpayers should run it, but taxpayers will is only expressed through politicians. I'm not sure I want Ted Kennedy or Dick Cheney screwing around with the monetary policy. The President appoints the board of directors who are confirmed by congress, after that, like the Supreme Court, its best that they remain independent. As an independent non elected entity they don't have to contend with lobbyists, voters ect. Thats a good thing. So long as we put good people on the Board, people who will take action to keep the economy healthy then the system works very well.
          • bc289, on 04/30/2008, -1/+1If you have an issue with the extent that the Federal Reserve is private, you must have an issue with the European Central Bank as well, which is also private and which not even the European Parliament can amend. The only way to change the ECB would be to amend the Maastricht Treaty, which would have to be approved and voted on by the citizens in every member country.

            Also, if you want more political control over the federal reserve, then you'd probably see more inflation than we see now. There'd be an incentive for those in power to stimulate the economy more than necessary.
    • relic180, on 04/30/2008, -9/+5We had a chance 4, 8 and 12 years ago. His name is Nader. Running almost exclusively on a platform of removing corporate America from government. But everybody has been more than content with voting for the 'lesser of two evils', and now this is where we are.
      • aukxsona, on 04/30/2008, -2/+3Oh God not that *****.
        • relic180, on 05/01/2008, -1/+1I could give a ***** what morons like you think of him. Bottom line is the only reason he doesn't get elected is because he isn't running as a major party candidate, and doesn't seek the endorsement of corporate America.
          But here's the REALLY WEIRD thing, I don't want a ***** Democrat or Republican president that's in the pocket of big business. But I'm sure you don't know ***** about him and simply blame him for that ***** Gore's loss.
          • aukxsona, on 05/05/2008, -0/+1Your a jerk. I voted for Nadar the first Time I ever voted. THEN I learned about his history. He made seat belts law. Talk about losing my rights. No thanks...I like the whole free college thing but not enough to give up my rights. So stop trying to insult me with low class words and actually debate why.....
          • relic180, on 05/05/2008, -0/+1I just deleted a huge post because I re-read it and it turns out it was much too mean to be constructive in any way. Essentially though, I think "I'm being forced to wear a seatbelt" is a ridiculous and baseless reason to decide your presidential vote and a huge stretch to try and imply that this somehow infringes on your rights. It's just a seatbelt.

            As far as needing to debate why? Well, I'm not going to, but instead just recommend you go and watch the documentary about Ralph, titled "An Unreasonable Man". If you watch it and still feel he's a freedom stealing ***** who doesn't deserve your vote.. then there's really nothing I can do for you.
    • mike17032, on 04/30/2008, -2/+6Chance to what? Laugh our asses off at some rambling old idiots retarded cave man style ideas on his pathetic run for president? If you total up his votes from all the primarys, it wouldnt win him governor of most states. The guy is a walking punch line, and you paultards who suck him off like he is the second coming while having no understand of his policies are even better.
  • jontalisman, on 04/30/2008, -3/+4Tell us something we don't know...
  • suntzusputnik, on 04/30/2008, -0/+25i gotta stay away from digg for a while, its morbidly depressing in here
    • EA2323, on 04/30/2008, -1/+8Unfortunately it's not just Digg, pretty much everywhere you go you hear about how bad things are, or how bad they are going to get.
      • Bamont, on 04/30/2008, -0/+1And I imagine the increase in the GDP for the first quarter is just propaganda?

        Give me a break. Digg is all about the doom and gloom. How many of these stories get knocked down to be nothing more than inaccurate drivel spawned by people with a defeatist and apologetic attitude?
    • EatingPie, on 04/30/2008, -6/+8Digg emphasizes and focuses on the negative, particularly in terms of ANYTHING related to Bush and the Republicans. Has there EVER been a positive article about something Bush has done? No matter how bad Bush is, he isn't doing EVERYTHING wrong, but that's all that we hear about, and that's all that gets Diggs.

      I'm actually curious about what will appear on Digg if Obama gets elected. Suddenly, no posts on Digg! :-)

      -Pie
      • pojut, on 04/30/2008, -2/+1Off the top of my head...no, I can't think of anything that Bush did right. Now, he has certainly TRIED many many times...but unfortunately, most of his efforts tend to make things worse. I used to admire the fact that he was at least trying...but I can't even do that these days.
      • bc289, on 04/30/2008, -1/+1The reason you can't think of anything is because every place highlights the negative and ignores the positive. Let me be clear - I think Bush has been a horrible president. However, it's pretty much impossible to have EVERY decision you make as a president be a negative one. I agree with eating pie. I mean, look at digg. All you see are negative comments of hillary clinton and positive comments of Obama. Even when Obama made the elitist comments, all I saw were "OBAMA'S PROBLEM? HE'S TOO CHARMING AND HANDSOME!!!" articles. The same can be said about the way religious articles get treated on digg (disclaimer: i'm not religious).

        Digg has its uses, but objective, unbiased articles is not one of them.
      • xonahuia, on 05/01/2008, -0/+1WTF do you expect from Bush? He's an idiot!!!
    • mike17032, on 04/30/2008, -3/+2It just the digg kiddies pitching their fit because its the first time they have ever seen things take a small down turn, learn to ignore them like the chicken littles that they are and just bury this *****.
    • aeoo, on 05/01/2008, -0/+1Stay away from elevators and water coolers too. :) It's actually not that depressing if you can see the light in this situation. The silver lining on the cloud. The glimmer of opportunity. And if you can remember that you are not harmed by this situation -- only your preferences (though they may be very strong) are harmed. It's not ideal, that's for sure, but it is something you can get through gracefully if your mind is open.
  • diggstown, on 04/30/2008, -7/+14How can you raise the red flag when unemployment is at 5%?
    • marketmou, on 04/30/2008, -5/+1How high would it be if there was no Iraq war?
      • sgiffy, on 04/30/2008, -0/+4Depends on how the funds being spent there were used. If we borrowed the same amount ans say spent in of infrastructure, eduction, and other job producing things, then possibly lower.
    • BassMastr, on 04/30/2008, -5/+7And today it was announced that we are in fact NOT in a recession. The talking heads on TV would have nothing to talk about if they didn't make it sound like the sky was falling...
      • relic180, on 04/30/2008, -1/+4Only that we're not officially in a recession. We are still experiencing almost non-existent economic growth continuing to slowly trend toward negative growth.
        Someone else would need to tell me if the growth figures are adjusted for inflation, but if they're not, then we're already on a downslope.
        • BassMastr, on 04/30/2008, -4/+5Agreed...by no means is it a roaring econ. I am just trying to point out that things aren't nearrly as bad as the talking heads want you too believe.
          • regeya, on 04/30/2008, -1/+2I'd also argue that many of the dire things we're hearing about are highly localized, like the bottom falling out of housing back in the 80s being mainly Texas.
            I'm having a hard time believing things are already horrible when most of us are still at the point where we're merely having to cut back a bit. I was born in the '70s, and sort of remember things my parents had to do to keep on their feet...things are still pretty dang good. Might need to consider curtailing some of that non-essential spending, folks, but not even that will cause the coming of the Apocalypse.
            I mean, the potential for economic disaster is still there, but despite all the calls for the head of the Fed board, they and other policy makers are tearing into the problem. Just because you hear on the news that they're doing nothing doesn't mean it's true. It's no more true than starving people in Haiti being due to a poor harvest in Australia.
        • CobaltBlue, on 04/30/2008, -1/+5@BassMastr : Take your logical comments and lack of hysterics about the economy elsewhere, mister. We don't cotton to your type round here.
        • BassMastr, on 04/30/2008, -1/+1@Cobalt haha no kidding it's like people are disappointed we aren't having a recession.
      • Damvan, on 04/30/2008, -0/+0You might be interested to know that you don't know you are in a recession until you have already been in it for 6 months.
        • BassMastr, on 05/01/2008, -0/+1Well no *****, but the econ has to actually shrink for one quarter before it can shrink for two. It has yet to shrink... With all the tax cuts and rebates going out it is unlikely that we will experience any major shrinkage going forward. (depending on who you listen to...) By the way if you are reading that it is time to get into the market from cnnmoney of whatever your favorite news source is...you missed the boat.
    • VIrus9, on 04/30/2008, -2/+7Unemployment figures don't take into account the number of Americans working for lower wages than they were just a few short years ago. It's becoming more and more common for people who were previously in the middle class to take sub-poverty wages just to have money to eat.
      • bc289, on 04/30/2008, -0/+1do you have the figures to support this claim? Where are the numbers that say the middle class are taking on sub-poverty wages?
        • aeoo, on 05/01/2008, -0/+1He's just giving an example saying that, whereas in the past it was unheard of, 3 years ago 2 middle class people became homeless and 1 year ago that number went up to 10. In other words, he doesn't need to come up with big numbers in order to have a valid point there. All he has to do is show a tendency in progress. And I think you can pick out a tendency for yourself if you read the news.
      • BassMastr, on 05/01/2008, -0/+2WTF is sub poverty anyways...Haitian?
    • Shotgunit, on 04/30/2008, -3/+4and also discouraged workers who have given up on trying to find jobs
      • sgiffy, on 05/01/2008, -1/+0There is a separate statistic that counts them and even if you add them to unemployment the increase is rather small.
    • DeFex, on 04/30/2008, -2/+5a job in walmart or starbucks does not count as a real job, but it makes great stats.
    • nycmac247, on 05/01/2008, -0/+3once you are off the rolls they claim you're not looking - just like inflation does not count food or fuel prices
  • therightside, on 04/30/2008, -2/+11Guess its time to buy stocks.
    • Aeaus, on 04/30/2008, -3/+12Haven't you heard, the world is crumbling around us, the only solution is to live under a rock and be ready for the next big depression!
      • relic180, on 04/30/2008, -1/+9I got a really badass rock picked out, with a great view.
    • BassMastr, on 04/30/2008, -5/+3100% correct...
      • BassMastr, on 04/30/2008, -1/+4OK so the recession (which didn't happen) is already priced into stocks and it's a proven fact that after every recession or when the market experiences a recession like fall the stocks on average bounce back to their original targets and even increase on average of 15% over the next year... But who cares about reality...I guess that's why the sheep never make money. They wait until the opinion is popular to make a move and by that time they have missed 75% on the increases. Idiots.
    • chuckDontSurf, on 04/30/2008, -0/+4Shhh, don't tell anyone. It'll be nice to have fire-sale prices for a while.
    • bdbr, on 04/30/2008, -0/+2The stock market isn't really down all that much. Its been going up over the past month, and is close to the price in January. If the doomsayers are right, the good deals are yet to come.
      • BassMastr, on 04/30/2008, -0/+2And if the doomsayers are wrong and the sky doesn't fall then you missed the great prices back in Jan, Feb, Mar... Don't do as Warrren Buffet says...do as he does. (He says the worst is yet to come, but he's pumping a ton of money into the market buying stuff up.)
    • aeoo, on 05/01/2008, -2/+2Not yet. You have to wait for the bottom to buy.
      • chuckDontSurf, on 05/01/2008, -0/+3So tell us, when is the bottom? That's right, you don't know. So you're going to keep waiting and waiting, miss the bottom, and then get in after you've missed the initial gains. This is why market timing doesn't work unless you're able to devote the equivalent of a full time job to it, and even then the odds are against you.
    • captric, on 05/01/2008, -1/+1This is a blessing in disguise for those that recognize the economy goes in cycles. I bought Master Card about 2 weeks ago - its already up28%!!!!! If you could that with your entire portfolio - you could retire early!
      • banderwocky, on 05/01/2008, -1/+1While you hide in Canada.
        • captric, on 05/01/2008, -0/+1I am in Florida bean head were the weather is beautiful and the people are educated, hard working, resourceful and wealthy beyond most Canadians dreams. I only spend a few months in Canada in the summer when I can tolerate the weather, and the cold and the rain and the ignorant people and the lack of professional health care.
  • Matters, on 04/30/2008, -6/+11This is stupid. People just need to live their lives for crying out loud! Part of the reason the economy is struggling right now is because of all this negativity. Sure it's not great right now, but everybody crying about it isn't going to make it any better. I'm not saying don't do anything about it, but bitching to get diggs? Come on... show me ONE thing that has changed for the better because of that. Raise awareness, not dissension.
    • Damvan, on 04/30/2008, -0/+0Bitching to get diggs got you 2 so far....
      • BassMastr, on 05/01/2008, -0/+1Too bad being correct hasn't gotten him any...
    • BassMastr, on 04/30/2008, -0/+2They need a footnote at at the bottom of the Consumer Confidence Index that says..."99% of consumers don't understand the economy" Meaning they are just repeating what talking heads are saying who in turn grab onto and embellish every negative story they can get their hands on, so basically they need to change this to the consumer propoganda meter.
    • aeoo, on 05/01/2008, -0/+2The economy is a purely psychological phenomenon. And you are right. :) If people bitch too much, they just drown themselves in salt and vinegar of their own making. On the other hand, if we don't bitch, then the powerful elites will think, "Oh, this is great?? No complaints? They must like it! Let's give it to them up their ass even harder... WOOO!!"

      If you don't complain, how can you blame the other person for hurting you, especially if the other person thinks it's been considered OK to do what they do for quite a while? Complaining has its place. The act of complaining doesn't have to depress us. We just need to keep a higher perspective when complaining.
  • chocobomog, on 04/30/2008, -2/+195 year low? Oh no, I barely survived at great depression of 2003. I don't think I could go through that horrible economic turmoil again...
    • sgtpppr, on 04/30/2008, -0/+1They sensationalize these things so that it looks like 'change' is constantly occurring. Politicians love it. If you make a 5% drop in the economy look like the apocalypse, a 5% increase makes you the messiah. Markets fluctuate. There is no point in exaggerating it or acting like it hasn't happened numerous times in the past. America generally likes doing it when an unpopular president is in his last term so that it is easier for the next president to regain the support of the masses. It keeps revolution at bay.
  • nukethewhales, on 04/30/2008, -1/+17I'm losing confidence in society. I was watching Idiocracy the other night and I fear for my kids. Because I think its coming true.
    • bullcutter, on 04/30/2008, -0/+3is it any good? i was thinking about renting it -- went straight to DVD did it?
    • Shotgunit, on 04/30/2008, -1/+1definitely go grab it
    • m00nflower, on 04/30/2008, -2/+1i bought water with electrolytes today for lunch
    • MrTea, on 04/30/2008, -0/+3If you fear for them now, just wait until Carl's Jr. is awarded their custody.
  • hohotrade, on 04/30/2008, -2/+05 years ? I think will be more years~
  • drmobutu, on 04/30/2008, -9/+3The GOP has sold America out to the Saudis...the Bush administration no longer has any incentive to improve the economy, and it will be up to somebody else to clean up the mess...
    • DeFex, on 04/30/2008, -1/+2what do you mean saudis, dont you mean saudis and chinese.
    • dafunkmonster, on 04/30/2008, -1/+1Whatever you're smoking, you should probably stop.
  • NonLeftistDiggr, on 04/30/2008, -3/+10Yet news released today say GDP actually went up last quarter. Go figure
    • FascistUtopia, on 04/30/2008, -2/+1yes, news released by the Commerce Dept, ie, the govt. yes, let's just lap up the good news delivered instead of believing what we see with our own eyes! dear lord what toolsl ppl like you are.
      • NonLeftistDiggr, on 04/30/2008, -1/+1Hey fukwad, I live in SoCal, I haven't met a single person that's been laid off yet, so take your DNC job-crisis spam and shove it.
      • bc289, on 04/30/2008, -1/+1ah yes, we are the ***** who rely on numbers rather than subjective visions that we see each day, which are not representative of the nation as a whole. You on the other hand, you're the bright one who shuns anything associated with the government because you're too paranoid to think that some things they release ARE accurate and backed (examined) by academics and economists in the nation.
  • LilBoyLuver, on 04/30/2008, -3/+4I tend to think that this particular recession was a self-fulfilling prophesy.

    The most telling evidence of this is the consumer confidence numbers such as this one. Everyone in my hometown loves talking about how ***** the economy is but I do not know anyone who has lost a job (I am not saying it hasn't happened but I am focusing on the attitudes of the people in my particular town)

    The only real thing that is affecting people around me is gas prices. If you ask anyone about the condition of the economy they will say terrible even though they themselves are not affected. It is the media stories about how bad the economy is that causes people to consume less and therefore creates the actual recession that we are in now.

    The consumer confidence numbers are so telling because it is not possible that this number of people have actually been affected yet, but people think they have been.
    • relic180, on 04/30/2008, -5/+3More than a self-fulfilling prophecy, maybe it's the first stages of a pre-planned systematic collapse of the economy. Some say the great depression was helped along, even steered a bit by shadowy financial interests...
      But, I'll turn my mega-conspiracy amplifier off now.
      • regeya, on 04/30/2008, -0/+1Wouldn't surprise me. If you look at financial-related websites, some of the most popular members state a number of conspiracy theories that just raise the fear level to un-Godly highs, and some of these contradictory examples are from one person. I don't kid. For a few examples: the Fed will cause disaster by lowering rates, raising rates, leaving rates as they are. The federal government would cause a financial disaster by leaving taxes where they are, lowering them, or raising them. If the federal government were to reform taxes as, say, Steve Forbes and Warren Buffet suggest, it would cause problems. Lowered oil prices would cause the Saudis to pull their money out and cause a currency collapse. If the value of the dollar were high again, we'd lose what little manufacturing we have left. If the value of the dollar stays low, China would pull out, and we'd have a currency collapse. By Iran trading oil in the Euro we'll have a currency collapse. If we attack Iran to force them to trade in dollars we'll have a currency collapse. If we keep using oil we'll have a financial collapse. if we develop alternative energies we're doomed. If we keep up the consumerism we're doomed. If we cut the consumerist speding we're doomed.

        GLOOOOOOOM

        DOOOOOOOOOOOM

        It does nothing to help and merely raises the blood pressure.
    • Damvan, on 04/30/2008, -1/+0Did you think that maybe things aren't so bad in your hometown, but that they could be bad elsewhere?
      • bc289, on 04/30/2008, -0/+2apparently they are NOT in many places, according to the latest gdp figures.
      • LilBoyLuver, on 05/01/2008, -0/+1You completely missed the point of what I was saying.

        The fact that things are not bad in my hometown but people still act like they have been affected is the problem that I am pointing out.
  • theregoesdave, on 04/30/2008, -3/+2i didn't believe it until the past few weeks and now i'm seeing hard times all around me
  • wiachy, on 04/30/2008, -1/+3even though the economy grew. yes, maybe by half a % or one whole %. all this proves is that the liberal doom and gloom media is running everything. oh, and Americans are idiots.
    • Damvan, on 04/30/2008, -1/+1Yeah, food is up 25%, gas is over $4 (paid $4.13 for regular this morning), foreclosures are up, housing prices are WAY down...but HEY, we had a .6% growth in GDP! Everything is FINE!
      You do realize that one way for the GDP to rise is to have workers produce more at the same or lower salary? Do you also realize that a major component of GDP is government spending, including federal salaries, and MILITARY EXPENDITURES? So the Fed can easily manipulate the GDP by spending more on the government over a short period of time to skew the numbers.
  • trujillonorte, on 04/30/2008, -2/+2i think worse is yet to come. gas almost 4 bucks a gallon
    • Digger1218, on 04/30/2008, -1/+1I bet it will peak at $5 or so in the next year and then people will start taking the bus more. Then prices will start to come down.
    • chuckDontSurf, on 04/30/2008, -1/+1Let it keep going up. That might be the only thing that gets people serious about alternative energy.
    • skellener, on 04/30/2008, -0/+1Premium gas will hit $5 this summer. It's been over $4 here in L.A. for a month.

      ***** big oil!! Ride a bike!!
    • xonahuia, on 05/01/2008, -0/+1It might peak to $10 a gallon
  • MrPig, on 04/30/2008, -2/+1If you tell me something hit a n-year low I would like to see a graph of it's current state vs the last 15 years at least.

    Where is my graph!
  • dhVyse, on 04/30/2008, -6/+1I think my confidence in our pollitical process was completely destroyed when George W. Bush managed to SOMEHOW fool everyone into electing him a second time. I just still can't get over that. Was I the only one who saw this coming with 4 more years of Bush?
    • Digger1218, on 04/30/2008, -1/+1He didn't fool everyone. It was the closest election in history.
    • Damvan, on 04/30/2008, -0/+1Nope, no one else saw it coming at all. You are the smartest among us. Why didn't you warn us?
  • TheLegacy23, on 04/30/2008, -13/+2Americans...BUY A BIKE!!! o weight they don't have any that will support your fat asses

    Opera SNOOP DOG 2012!!!
  • jerrolds, on 04/30/2008, -2/+1Ouch.
  • vexingmodstwo, on 04/30/2008, -1/+2So what they're saying is that five years ago... hmmm... that would be around the time of the last Presidential Primary season, huh? Now, a critical person would think that maybe a lot of this is caused by all the gloom and doom tactics used by politicians to drum up support from the masses...
  • mikeyellenlee, on 04/30/2008, -4/+2The Fox news channel has been trying to convince its audience all day today that the country is not in a recession...

    what the hell?
    • vexingmodstwo, on 04/30/2008, -0/+3Why do you watch Fox?
      • mikeyellenlee, on 05/16/2008, -0/+1I watch all the news channels and compare.
    • insanebrain, on 04/30/2008, -1/+1- "what the hell?"
      Fox. . hell . .good comparison.
    • MikeFallopian, on 04/30/2008, -1/+0We're not in a recession. The most common definition of a recession is 2 consecutive quarters of negative growth, and we haven't seen one yet. Whether or not we're heading for a recession is a different story, and impossible to predict.
    • Damvan, on 04/30/2008, -0/+2Because Fox is the spokesman for the present Administration, and the Administration is doing whatever it can to deny that the economy is bad, or that we are in recession.
    • BassMastr, on 05/01/2008, -0/+1Go look up the definition of recession and then read this...
      http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D90C9CPG0& ...
      Don't be so upset...this is actually a good thing.
  • republicker, on 04/30/2008, -7/+2I would piss in uncle sam's mouth if his teeth were on fire. This ***** economy is nothing more that a plan to eliminate the middleclass and make us all slaves.
  • insanebrain, on 04/30/2008, -1/+1The sad thing is that Americans are losing faith because of 'rising gas and food prices and weakening job prospects'.
    The rest of the world lost their faith a 100 years ago.
  • NelsonR, on 04/30/2008, -5/+0Another interest rate decline. What is the matter with Bernanke and Paulson and where is our illustrious leader, JOKE, JOKE BUSHIE. Interest rate declines lead to inflation, DUH. Interest rate declines lead to a WORTHLESS DOLLAR. And these are our leaders, unbelievable. Reminds me of the little boy putting his finger in the dam leak and thinking, OK all is well. Got to love Republicans and a person should consider McCain who acknowledges the same economic intelligence as BUSHIE. When MY CDs and IRA's mature I am doing what our elite are doing, getting my money out of the U.S. and into foreign stocks and currencies. If they can screw America why not me.
    • MikeFallopian, on 04/30/2008, -0/+0Yes, low interest rates lead to inflation. They also spur investment and may prevent us from going into a recession. The rates aren't going to be at 2.0% forever - when the economy rebounds, they will be raised again and inflation will be slowed.
      • NelsonR, on 04/30/2008, -0/+0You are being optimistic. Sorry, our economy is based upon consumer spending. The consumer is tapped out while being loaded with credit card, mortgages, lines of credit and so forth. The economy will tank further, homes will devalue by approx. 35 to 50 percent in value and foreclosures have only just begun. Meanwhile the investors drive up commodity prices seeking the almighty dollar and the world economy will sink. Now that's being pragmatic and seeing what is. By the way, I predicted the housing bubble bursting years ago, like many, where were you?
        • MikeFallopian, on 05/01/2008, -0/+030 to 50 percent homes devaluation is a highball estimate. Even 30 would surprise me. Regardless, the worst thing that could happen to consumers is a recession, in which many jobs would be lost, further spurring foreclosures. The positive growth last quarter came as a surprise to most analysts - do you not think that the Fed's moves last quarter had an effect here? If we had posted negative growth confidence would fall for investors and consumers, and we would have a ticket to recessionville. As it is, we have a good chance of avoiding a recession for the small price of temporary but steep inflation. I'll take it.
        • BassMastr, on 05/01/2008, -0/+1The reason people are optimistic is b/c we understand that the world is a lot bigger than the US. Homes MIGHT go that much lower in a FEW markets, not across the board.
  • rbk303, on 04/30/2008, -2/+2@ lpxxfaintxx2
    The only way your generation will solve the world's problems is if you nuke Texas.
    • NelsonR, on 04/30/2008, -0/+1Bush would be in Washington so a waste of time and innocents.
  • chrissku, on 04/30/2008, -0/+75 yr low? My confidence is at an all time low. We need to get our problems at home fixed before we try to fix the problems in the middle east.
  • reynolds3g, on 04/30/2008, -0/+2When the housing crisis started, I didn't get too worried, because I have a home I can afford, I figured its not going to affect me. But now with gas going through the roof and job prospects falling it affects more than I had thought. Now I do have to clamp down a bit and just hope things turn up again. I am sure it will, with time, but its not exciting to be living through an economic downturn.
  • skellener, on 04/30/2008, -1/+4Trickle down economics.....no faith in Bush for the last 8 years was eventually gonna hit the economy.
  • thetopcrusader, on 04/30/2008, -1/+3This is news?
  • trixterIreland, on 04/30/2008, -4/+0I keep hearing about these $4/gallon gas prices, its more than double that in NL (70% gas tax though) and people dont whine nearly as much as they do in the US. Were it not for gas subsidies in the US gas prices would be much higher, yes federal tax dollars do offset the cost of gas makes you wonder why there is also a federal excise tax on gas, seems wasteful to pay the government workers to collect from peter to pay paul ...
    • bdbr, on 04/30/2008, -0/+2If the US was no more spread out than the NL, we probably wouldn't whine about it either.
    • Damvan, on 04/30/2008, -0/+1Maybe because your entire country is smaller than all but 9 of our 50 states. I live in San Bernardino County, one of 58 counties in California, and it is 33% bigger than all of NL by itself.
  • dildoolielly, on 04/30/2008, -8/+8Who re-elected these Terrorists?!! Complete retards you Bush psychos are!!

    Bush is a DICTATING, ONE-LINER, HUCKSTER, DRUNK, DESERTING, GRANDSTANDING, IDIOT, CRIMINAL, PUPPET SHRILL who recites Nazi propaganda from scripted speeches of empty promises and platitudes written by UNBRIDLED, CORPORATE WHORE, LOBBYISTS through the use of FAKE CABLE NEWS NETWORKS to a bunch of FOXIFIED, ZOMBIE, NUTJOB, IDIOT, BRAINWASHED, INBRED, REDNECK RETARDS!

    Never forget who supported this complete and utter failure, don't let them distance themselves from him. Whining about Libs and Dems and Clinton and Kerry and gay sex, while offering nothing of substance - and most notably - no defense for the lying little sack of ***** from Texas they shackled us with!

    America's enemy is the idiot who IGNORED that Bush lied to us about Iraq, IGNORED that Bush defends treason, IGNORED that Bush was asleep at the wheel on 9/11, IGNORED that Bush had already blundered our war effort in Iraq, IGNORED that Bush still tries to link Iraq and 911, IGNORED that Bush was going to run amok with our Constitution, IGNORED his continued policy that fuels extremist groups and floods intelligence agencies with "false positives" from illegal wiretapping operations—among other things and still voted to re-elect this miserable failure.

    The enemy from within has perpetuated this death and devastation. Don't forget it.

    It is because of a bush voter that the country is in the atrocious position it is in today.
    • seomike, on 04/30/2008, -2/+1yada yada yada I'm sure Nadar will be happy for your vote.
      But your rant may help educate the econotards. This is all the more reason to get economic influence away from Washington. Our economy is built to thrive around cheep energy. It started long before Bush when we decided to throw Americans under the bus to save a few caribou and continues after investing half a trillion in some piece of ***** desert and not seeing barges full of free oil one after the other from the Gulf of Mexico to the Persian Gulf.
      • dildoolielly, on 05/01/2008, -1/+3And, BTW, Bush bankrupted every company he owned

        GW Bush Jr has already bankrupted - Arbusto Energy Corp.
        GW Bush Jr has already bankrupted - Spectrum 7 Corp.
        GW Bush Jr has already bankrupted - Bush Exploration Company
        GW Bush Jr has already bankrupted - Harken Energy Corp.

        Consider the above pattern to complete the following sentence:
        GW Bush Jr will soon __________ the United States of America.

        With a track record like that, anyone that would re-elect Bush would have to be a complete Retard! Who in Bazzaro land would re-elect this nutcase?!!
    • Dibou, on 04/30/2008, -2/+1Keith? Is that you?
    • thallium205, on 04/30/2008, -2/+2/ tinfoil hat ?
    • ralph12c41, on 05/01/2008, -2/+2Please call your Doctor ...he made an error in your medication prescription yesterday.
  • JohnGalt72, on 04/30/2008, -1/+2Until we, the people, understand a bit of what causes the bubbles and busts of our economic cycle, we are doomed to have our wealth looted from us by our Congressional overspending, deficit financing, and the almighty Federal Reserve System. Shrink the Federal Gov't folks. Stop asking for wars, welfare and regulation from the Feds.
  • regeya, on 04/30/2008, -0/+1I think every time I see this number, it's at an all-time low, and it's different all the time. The last time I saw it, it was at a new 18-year low.
    So...gain?
    Now, I'm not ignoring that there are HUGE problems in America right now...just trying to keep some perspective. If, during a time where we still have relative good times, people start hoarding, stockpiling, pulling their money out of the bank, etc. we'll have a MUCH LONGER, DEEPER recession. If, however, at this point we show a little damn faith in the system (broken as it may be) it's possible we'll come out of this mess stronger than ever.
    Just barricade the senior citizens' doors before the next election, especially the ones who leave Fox News on all the time, and all will be well. Kidding!
  • Punim, on 04/30/2008, -1/+2Whew - time to buck up a little people. $4 a gallon is cheap gas. Then again the average American has only traveled to one country so most people lack any sense of what the rest of the world is really like. Since when is it OK to buy something then a year or so later walk away from it like a spoiled child without paying for it? If you think Iraq and our GOV is a problem perhaps we should start holding our selves responsible for our own problems? I love how people like to blame the GOV for things when really its all us Americans making stupdid decisions that are leading to the major issues. We did Vote for Shrub remember? Not that our other choices were that great either.
    • skellener, on 04/30/2008, -0/+2Only half voted for shrub.
      • Punim, on 04/30/2008, -0/+150% is plenty shoot even 20% makes a statement regarding policies
  • Dibou, on 04/30/2008, -0/+1Only a 5-year low?! You are slacking MSM. I know we missed another chance at getting us into a recession with that 0.6% growth rate, but you can still talk us into one yet. Keep trying hard!
    • Damvan, on 04/30/2008, -1/+0Look up what goes into the GDP calculation, and you will realize how easy it is for the Government to manipulate that number.
  • IllBeBack, on 04/30/2008, -0/+2I am scared. I believe it is time to start hording as many marshmallow peeps and chicks as you can afford to ride this thing out. It could be a long time.
    • EA2323, on 05/01/2008, -0/+0Don't forget the twinkies
    • ralph12c41, on 05/01/2008, -0/+1We lived through the Presidency of Jimmy Carter...we can live through anything!!
    • joe8pack, on 05/01/2008, -0/+1trivialize as much you need to, if that's your defense mechanism, but don't discount the reality - GDP(Gross Domestic Product) is down to .3% growth that about as low as you can go and still have a non-negative number. If you plot a trend its currently downward, once a trend begins it will continue until something happens to negate or reverse it. What high growth stimulus factors do you see on the horizon that eludes the Federal Reserve, I'm sure they could use your insights.
  • seomike, on 04/30/2008, -1/+2Ya well both sides are to blame. It started more than 30 years ago when the Sierra Clubs and tree hugger organizations decided that building more oil refineries on the coast lines would damage wild life. It progressed further to Caribou migration > American Bread Winners as we cannot even harvest our own resources from our own lands to keep the oil flowing. So we invade other territories to secure cheep energy and bankrupt the nation doing it. Then we turn our food supply into fuel because the trend is to be green. We vote all these bastards into office and get very little ROI...
    • joe8pack, on 05/01/2008, -1/+1Its got very little to do with the source of Oil, currently Alaska oil is selling for as much as OPEC oil and is being exported to other countries. The oil companies possess no special love for America, like most multi-national corporations the only thing they respect, desire, or believe in is profit. Currently Exxon is the most profitable corporation out there. The amount of ethanol being produced in comparison to petroleum is trivial. Ethanol doesn't have to be made from food sources like corn, so ask yourself why it is being made from corn? Who benefits? ConAgra, Archer Daniels Midland and other agricultural corporations. See a pattern yet? Your getting stroked by the Corporations, a much harder target to flail against and gnash your teeth with fist upraised. The same Corporations that lobbied for "free trade" agreements that sent so many American jobs overseas and wound up shuttering so many domestic factories.

      They are plenty of Oil Refineries, no one is having trouble finding gasoline to put in their cars, it is the price which makes it difficult to purchase it to put into cars. Learn how to recognize a problem, cause you can't solve it if you don't understand it. A thousand refineries wouldn't help if we can't afford the product. Look up Peak Oil - its says the 2nd half of the oil in the bell curve will become much more expensive to extract. So you have 2 possibilities, corporate greed or peak oil or some blend of both factors. Either way you can't drill yourself out of this problem, demand will soon outstrip resources, a natural effect of spreading population and trade. Either we find alternatives and invest in them or we're stroked. The Peak Oil paradigm holds that we will be stuck in a cycle of recessions and tepid recoveries as we work our way around the bell curve, so this is the foreseeable future without new alternative energy resource. So stop trying to find someone to blame and try to figure out how to fix it. If we don't make an effort, things won't change and people will believe every crap thing they hear on talk radio - a medium dominated by giant corporations - wonder what they want you to think?
  • yoyoyodude, on 04/30/2008, -0/+2Uh Oh not another great depression!!!???
  • robthom, on 04/30/2008, -0/+8Wow. In related news, Americans mildly perturbed by loss of freedoms, government sanctioned murder overseas and 15% of the population receiving 75% of the nations wealth.
    Nation then proceeds to contemplate whether to watch reruns of Heroes or Deal or no Deal tonight over frozen lasagne.
  • johnstar, on 04/30/2008, -1/+3My best friend got layed off, and they're laying off at my job now too. I have been there less than a year, I am starting to get freeked out
    I'll lose my medical and my dental.
    • Punim, on 04/30/2008, -0/+1Been there done that. Always ask your self one question (Am I making money for the company?) if you can't answer that try another one (If I leave can they function with out me?)

      If your answers are No I'm not making money for the company and yes they can function without me - then you need to either find a way to be an important contributor or be prepared to get booted when things get tight. Thats just the reality of it.

      I was out of work for 10 months and made sure that at my next gig I have plenty of visability and that it would hurt if I left. It sucks!!! - hunker down do some self review work on your skill set and find a role that makes you a critical part of the company.
  • ekfritz, on 04/30/2008, -0/+1The majority of complaining diggers here wouldn't know REAL hardship if it bit them on the arse. Just saying... if you think it's bad right now you're terribly weak in character.
  • Sizzor, on 04/30/2008, -0/+1Have you watched the news lately? It's all about Miley Cyrus and Obama's pastor. Who cares about such things when the Economy and the Iraq disaster are the real issues?

    Digg me down, but that's why I voted for Ron Paul. One word: Substance.
  • gigamugged, on 04/30/2008, -0/+1This is a great graph to ponder:

    http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/series/NFORBR ...

    ...basically the banking system would be non-functional if it weren't for massive federal intervention.
    • NelsonR, on 05/01/2008, -0/+0Put yourself at being a banker. You pay a low interest rate, (Prime) from the U.S. government and you get to set a higher interest rate to a borrower legally. How in the hell do you then write down billions each quarter in losses? It's called being a white collar elitist within our society. Now probably you and definitely me could make money legally if we were not like these jerks, yet they get away with thievery that the American public pays for in the end. Our financially leaders are crooks who should have been in jail with Manson long ago but the average Joe Blowe doesn't understand governing occurrences.
  • Fetching more discussions...
    Show 51 - 63 of 63 discussions
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.