Submitted by
Users who Dugg This
Cosmic Surfer - WE ARE the 99%
3670 Followers
Russ Smith
18392 Followers
Pinkpackrat
1247 Followers
NewsMeBack
6467 Followers
craig1958Jan 19, 2012
It's just another cycle, the economy has probably been improving for a while now but it always takes longer for Joe Public to see it. The public will notice when there is a significant reduction in unemployment, but this will be one of the last indicators.
daimposterJan 19, 2012
You hit it right on the nail. Unemployment is typically one of the last indicators. GDP can rise and company profits can rise but they are slower to higher more people.
rednipJan 19, 2012
Ten strait quarters of GDP growth and many still call it 'a recession'.
treehugger87Jan 19, 2012
That's because the growth is all being horded by those who control the wealth. They have theirs and they are not willing to share.
The truth is our economy is very strong for those who have the means to control it.
spc4Jan 19, 2012
Dude, you are a f**king idiot if you believe any one who earns a buck is suppose to "share" it. I try to keep every bit of a dollar I make. I'll be damned if some tree hugger is going to tell me I should share it.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
treehugger87Jan 19, 2012
I'm not talking about "any one who earns a buck," I am talking about the 0.1% wealthiest so-called Americans. And by not willing to share, I mean they are hording the money, not investing it, not hiring people and not participating in the types of activities that would help the economy. They don't give a s**t that for 99% of Americans the country is collapsing.
The wealthy control the wealth, and they have proven that they are not willing to "share" that wealth. They are hoarders of the worst kind.
kasha34Jan 20, 2012
When they judge it to their advantage, they'll invest. Or do you want "pity investing"?
Historically, leftists always complain about "hoarders." Lenin, Castro and Mao for example.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
daimposterJan 19, 2012
I agree with your assessment of the economy but i still wouldn't call it a 'recession'. Income inequality is not the same as recession.
eraptorJan 20, 2012
The problem with using GDP as a metric is that it does not provide an accurate assessment of employment, one's economic opportunities or the distribution of wealth/income. These economic metrics are FAR more relevant to the discussion and concerns of MOST voters.
u2canfailJan 19, 2012
Companies here are starting to hire. Even those who did not want to hire anyone, until after the 2012 elections, are out of options. They need workers.
miklkitJan 19, 2012
I have young relatives, nephews and cousins, who have been out of work for a long long time who have finally found jobs. Things are starting to improve a little.
readmikenowJan 19, 2012
We can only assume the people who believe the economy is improving are gainfully employed. The others may have a situation where there're struggling. I believe what you think of the economy is based on your own employment situatuon.
chassupJan 19, 2012
If my brother in law loses his job it's a shame, if I lose my job it's a depression.
kasha34Jan 20, 2012
You don't like your brother that much, I guess.
daimposterJan 19, 2012
Not exactly but there are some elements of it.
People can believe the economy is doing better but be unemployed and people can believe the economy is doing worse but be happily employed. The poll wouldn't go from 10% to 25% in 6 months while unemployment only dropped .5% pts.
I believe the economy is doing better yet the company I work for remains almost unchanged compared to 2009 and 2010 in terms of performance.
reaper527Jan 19, 2012
1 in 4 saying the economy is getting better isn't saying very much. that means the vast majority say that it isn't improving, and is either staying the same or getting worse.
treehugger87Jan 19, 2012
It's saying a lot when you consider that 6 months ago it was only 1 in 10 saying the same. That represent a 250% growth in the number of people who think things are getting better. I would call that significant.
daimposterJan 19, 2012
And a growth in consumer confidence from 10% to 25% will likely spur more spending....thus improving the economy. Since 2008, individuals have been saving at much higher rates than previously and companies have been hoarding profits.
ghengiskhan1Jan 19, 2012
New Headline:
3 of 4 people do not think the economy is getting better.
That headline is just as accurate as the original, but it makes people have a frowny face and we cant have that!
jhw539Jan 19, 2012
It is common to mention what is actually different, you know - NEWs - in the headline. Hence the mention that, in a change from the past few months, the number of people seeing the economy getting better is much higher, up to 1 in 4 (it was 1 in 10). The number seeing it getting worse is much lower, now 1 in 3 (it was 1 in 2).
Closed AccountJan 19, 2012
What's interesting is that that is *precisely* the attitude Obama haters felt all Americans should have under Bush's 8 years in office. One has to wonder if your critical thinking skills were equally engaged back then.
treehugger87Jan 19, 2012
Until a President you like takes over, then the original headline will be more than good enough for you, amirite?
As the chart demonstrates, the percent who think the economy is getting better is up from 10% just 6 months ago. The percent who think it is worse is down to from 50% at the same point.
ghengiskhan1Jan 19, 2012
If there was a president I liked and the economy was doing this poorly I would rightfully conclude that he or she was a failure and I would regret having voted for him or her. I would recognize that attempts were made to improve things and those attempts failed. I would hope that my president would stop being president because s/he sucked so badly and because so many people were suffering because of his/her bad decisions.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
daimposterJan 19, 2012
problem with that analogy is that it is not reffering to the trend. 1 in 4 say it is getting better reflects the increase from 1 in 10 just 6 months ago.
netantJan 20, 2012
To all you people who need to be clued:
This topic is merely a political question. If you think the economy has improved, then you will probably support the current regime. If you don't think its improved, then you'll use it as a rationale to vote in a new regime, regardless of how sketchy it appears.
The economy has improved, like the way it has stopped raining after a flood. You're still flooded, and everyone knows it. Guess what happens if/when Europe's banking starts to meltdown? It will effect our economy again, and Republicans will blame Obama for something utterly outside of his control. And that will be their rationale to put in a new guy who is probably even less equipped to "fix" the problem.
When I vote in November, it won't be about whether the economy has improved or not. Its beyond Obama's direct control. It will be about my analysis of the candidates who are running. I suggest everyone here should be looking at the RELEVANT questions.
monvalleyJan 19, 2012
obama has already told us the economy is good, but he needs to make it better yet, so of course the economy is better, the king of fools told us so. And the cheerleaders, abc, cbs, nbs and cnn don't even talk about the economy so it must be good. Damn, I wish my buddies and me could find a job.
chassupJan 19, 2012
Obamanomics are bankrupting us!
https://fbcdn-sphotos-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-ash4/401480_10150491126715911_134193140910_9338995_1155083337_n.jpg
kasha34Jan 20, 2012
That's the purpose. It's a variation of Cloward-Piven.
ferretmanJan 19, 2012
Wow, so that only means 75% don't?
(Checking the poll....)
Yeah, looks like that's accurate.....
raidy11moonJan 19, 2012
Before Obama, i had no job. After Obama took over, I have had 2 and just started a new job in a top Architecture firm
chassupJan 19, 2012
3 jobs in 3 years is not a resume enhancer.
miklkitJan 19, 2012
Why? I have had as many as 7 jobs in 8 months. Now I'm retired on a Union pension.
chassupJan 19, 2012
i get it, you had me at "union."
thespookJan 19, 2012
Your union and pension are part of the reason American companies are in the red and cannot afford to hire domestically.
emkaysmithJan 20, 2012
You don't approve of pensions? Screw you. I spent 33 years as a (professional-level) municipal employee and never made more than 2/3 what my public-sector peers were earning. And only the cops & firefighters had unions. (And most of those people were card-carrying conservative Republicans.) I enjoyed my job, though, more than I would have if I had been saddled with the profit motive. And when I retired, I got a very nice pension -- to which I had contributed 5% of every paycheck I ever earned, so it certainly wasn't a freebie. I earned every damned penny of it. Which means that by the time I die, I expect my lifetime earnings will have approximated the lifetime earnings of those in the same job in the private sector. Plus, I have the careful investments I made during all those years. So what the hell is wrong with pensions? Or is it simply that you can't hold onto a job?
kasha34Jan 20, 2012
Public sector or private?
lew2048Jan 19, 2012
Propaganda.
I think that the last round of stimulus is finally getting into the economy. Because the actual effect is ever-diminishing, it won't be a big boost and will disappear.
The Fed's desire to have incumbents re-elected is one of the reasons they produce the boom-bust cycle. The other reason is that is good for the oligarchy : poor and middle class people have to sell assets at the bottom of the cycle, the rich buy at the bottom of the cycle. Assets include businesses, stock, bonds, houses, ...Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
ren1999Feb 15, 2012
Things to keep in mind when we talk about an improving U.S. economy.
1. The U.S/multi-national economy has been good since 2008 and executives have been paying themselves fired middle manager's wages.
2. Republicans finally gave up fighting Obama to create construction jobs because the economy has finally taken so much of a beating that these executives aren't earning so much anymore because they have fewer customers.
3. There is only a boom in low wage jobs like drivers, elderly care, i.e. jobs that great software and robots haven't replaced people yet.
4. Unemployment is down from 9.2 to 8.2% but it needs to drop to 5%. The Underemployment rate went up from 16% to 18% and that needs to drop to 5%.
5. The GDP, the stock market, the banks, none of that determines consumer health. People working for fair wages determines that.
gkiltzJan 20, 2012
It is...SLOWLY! But oil prices threaten to derail it.
Closed AccountJan 19, 2012
Opinions are subjective - simple as that really.
treehugger87Jan 19, 2012
Individuals opinions are subjective. Polls on opinions are indicative.
ghengiskhan1Jan 19, 2012
They are indicative of the subjective opinions of many people. Those subjective opinions are frequently clouded by personal bias and personal experience.
Interestingly enough, my personal economy has been consistently improving over the past 8 years. Every year is better than the last. But do I think the economy in general is improving? Not only "no" but "hell no". Why? because there is an economic s**t storm brewing out there that is going to wipe almost everyone out and we are only making it worse.
chassupJan 19, 2012
Having a job is good, and making more each year is great, but the economy is far more than a job and a paycheck.
Let's see, are you paying more for things like gas and groceries since Obama was sworn in? (gas $1.79/gal. on innauguration day, now it's over $3.60 Food up 15% at least.)
How's the housing market? On its back.
Other indicators: Food stamp use way way up. Private sector lost 3 million jobs. Under-employment added to unemployment is over 15%, real unemployment when you add those not looking for a job anymore is over 20%.
ghengiskhan1Jan 19, 2012
I totally agree. That was kinda my point as well.
limitgovJan 19, 2012
they have a funny way of defining a "healthy economy". I guess for politicians its fine...they'll keep getting a nice paycheck from the people.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
treehugger87Jan 19, 2012
10 straight quarters of GDP growth isn't a "healthy economy" for you?
limitgovJan 19, 2012
well, it all depends on where that growth is coming from. Also, look at the unemployment rate. Its horrible. Don't try and defend Obama. Leave that criminal to do as he does, take away more freedoms. Don't play the left/right game. Both sides are corrupt.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
antialiasJan 19, 2012
If the unemployment rate continues to go down at the same rate it has over the past few quarters, it will be lower at election time than when Bush left office.
limitgovJan 19, 2012
unemployment is very high. And, the government numbers don't count all the unemployed. They skew their numbers, just like the inflation numbers are skewed by not including energy and food.
antialiasJan 19, 2012
If they are skewed now, then they are always skewed unless they have changed the way they count. My point still stands that we should be close to the same unemployment when Obama took office, or lower by the time the election hits. Also, unemployment has not been below 4% since WWII, meaning that 4% unemployment is pretty much considered "full employment". So the current rate of unemployment (8.9% last I heard) means there are around 5% who really need/want a job and can't find it.
To put it another way, out of every 100 workers, only 5 can't get a job right now.
limitgovJan 19, 2012
you don't get it. the numbers they use are not correct. they are not counting people who no longer collect unemployment but still need a job. if this is a good economy to you, I'd hate to see a bad one.
antialiasJan 19, 2012
By almost every measurable statistic the economy is better than it was 2 years ago. I'm not saying it's "good" yet, but it's much better and has been on an obvious upswing for awhile now. Jobs are some of the last things to appear in a recovery and we've been seeing job growth for a few quarters now. Unless the European mess or something else tanks the recovery, we will be well on our way to a "good" economy.
limitgovJan 19, 2012
but you see, the source of those jobs makes a huge difference. if the government just stole the wealth from the market and created government jobs, no new wealth was created.
limitgovJan 19, 2012
plus 45 million Americans on food stamps. And the national debt has exploded from $9 trillion when the recession began to $15 trillion today. that's a healthy good economy? No...things are not good.
kasha34Jan 20, 2012
@limitgov
"the government just stole the wealth from the market and created government jobs..." BINGO!
Or printed the money and "created' jobs. Or borrowed it.
Hell, just hire half the unemployed to dig a hole every day. And the other half to fill it in. Presto -- full employment.
treehugger87Jan 19, 2012
It doesn't really depend on where it's coming from, the fact is it is growing. It is also a fact that the benefits of that growth is being hoarded by the rich.
http://www.slate.com/content/dam/slate/blogs/moneybox/2012/01/12/mitt_romney_says_concern_about_inequality_is_just_quot_envy_quot_/1326377035513.png
limitgovJan 19, 2012
"It doesn't really depend on where it's coming from"
It absolutely does matter. If government is just stealing wealth from the market and putting it into government, no new wealth is being created.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
treehugger87Jan 19, 2012
Collecting taxes does not effect GDP. Nor is collecting taxes equivalent to "stealing wealth".
You lack the knowledge necessary to try and speak about economics coherently.
kasha34Jan 20, 2012
Uh, no limitgov understands perfectly.
limitgovJan 20, 2012
If you had 100% tax rate it would shut down an economy. Of course taxes effect the GDP and economy.
chassupJan 19, 2012
Yeah, and 20% of Americans are mentally ill (name two demographics that are loyal to Obama-- women and young adults)
One in five adults in the United States, or nearly 50 million people, suffered mental illnesses in 2010, with women and young adults suffering disproportionately, a government report released on Thursday found.
The survey by the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration found women were more likely than men (23 percent versus 16.8 percent) to have experienced a mental illness, while the rate of mental illness among people aged 18 to 25 was twice that of those aged 50 and older.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
angelofchaos99Jan 19, 2012
Yeah, lifelong oppression will have that effect on people.
kasha34Jan 20, 2012
Lifelong what? Oppression? Are you kidding?
Please tell me where and when it was better than the USA in the current era?
Lifelong oppression?
angelofchaos99Jan 20, 2012
Since you want to know who's treating women better than the USA (and how), enjoy at your leisure:
http://reports.weforum.org/global-gender-gap-2011/
kasha34Jan 20, 2012
How come lefties are always assigning reams of reading? How about instead YOU tell me what YOU think? Then include the relevant quote and link that supports your argument?
Besides, you're changing your story. You started out with ...LIFELONG OPPRESSION. Now you're saying there might be someplace that treats women "better."
angelofchaos99Jan 20, 2012
It's not changing my story when I suggest that there are places that oppress women less.
See, if I just gave my opinion then you'd simply tell me it's an unsubstantiated opinion. When I give you data you complain that it's too dense. Educating oneself about issues helps a person understand them - no matter what the issues are.
The Scandinavian countries are overall better at not oppressing females than the USA, from what I've read. Arguably, the worst ones are Asian countries that view girls as unwanted births, and have declining female birth rates. (Actually, many Indian girls are named "Unwanted" in Hindi.)
Oppression in the USA can be subtler than in some countries, it's true - not many women get their c**toris cut off in this country, for instance. But there is still a pay discrepancy (yes, even for women in the same exact job/field as men), denying women leadership positions, sexual and societal double-standards, judging women mainly on ever changing societal parameters for attractiveness (and women can get fired for being too attractive, as well), blaming victims in case of rape and not prosecuting rapists, etc. The list goes on.
More simply, misogyny is like the matrix, it's there when you go to church, when you do your taxes... It's built into most all societies because they're patriarchal (male-dominated). Domination is inherent in hierarchical systems.
kasha34Jan 20, 2012
Well, I wouldn't say everything is equal for both sexes in the US. But "lifelong oppression"?
Regarding unequal pay -- this is addressed in Super Freakanomics.
They looked at MBAs. Turns out that women choose to work less hours. And take long hiatuses from their careers. Which, of course, puts them at a disadvantage in pay and promotion. But puts them at an advantage when it comes to bonding with their children.
All I saying is that, in my opinion, the phrase "lifelong oppression" was a little strong.
emkaysmithJan 20, 2012
With a Republican in the White House for twenty years out of the past thirty, I'm surprised the national mental illness rate isn't higher.
chassupJan 20, 2012
At some point you have to stop blaming others for your own life's failures.
kasha34Jan 20, 2012
Those Republican presidents were elected, you know. So you object to the election system?