General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsKrugman: repubicans are "desperately trying to claim that the economic recovery now underway is an
illusion."Liberals, Conservatives, and Jobs
Just about everything I write evokes vituperative reactions from the usual suspects, but never so much as when I point out awkward facts. So there was a lot of mud-slinging when I pointed out last summer that Californias economy which conservatives said was doomed by tax increases and generally liberal policies was in fact experiencing an impressive recovery.
Why does this sort of thing bother conservatives so much? Well, its an essential part of their belief structure that they have a secret sauce that lets them deliver job growth that liberals cant, as Rand Paul declared.
Am I claiming that Democratic presidents were responsible for all this job creation? No, not at all, nor do I need to. The point, instead, is that their policies didnt prevent a lot of employment growth. That is, what you learn from both national experience and the California story is that you can raise taxes on the rich and expand access to health care without killing the economy.
Republicans, by contrast, need to claim that Reaganomics produced all the job growth of the 80s, just as they used to claim that Bushs ownership society was responsible for any and all good news in the 2000s. Thats why theyre desperately trying to claim that the economic recovery now underway is an illusion.
They cant handle the truth.
http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2015/03/24/liberals-conservatives-and-jobs/?_r=0
"They can't handle the truth." That is the short summary everything republican.
Vincardog
(20,234 posts)hifiguy
(33,688 posts)while expecting different results. The simplest explanation of Repuke anything, ever.
mindwalker_i
(4,407 posts)The results that they get are what they want. The results aren't what we want.
On the Road
(20,783 posts)lol
TheMastersNemesis
(10,602 posts)The media is about to cheerlead for them and give them credit.
Johonny
(20,683 posts)Republican Governors hadn't slashed state payrolls, run up huge state deficits by cutting state taxes, passed a federal jobs program, increased minimum wage, not end unemployment benefits, not attacked food stamps, not shutdown the government... Not one fucking thing they've done has been good for the economy.
liberal_at_heart
(12,081 posts)tridim
(45,358 posts)But thanks for trying to convince me that the recovery is all an illusion.
Maybe you should reread the article, apparently it's about you.
abelenkpe
(9,933 posts)Thousands of other once good paying VFX jobs in LA. Chart doesn't illustrate that reality. But glad to hear things are lovely for you.
whatthehey
(3,660 posts)Your post is the former, the chart shows the latter.
Tens of millions of CA and TX residents in a recovery mean much more than an individual's tale of woe, except to that individual.
hughee99
(16,113 posts)The chart doesn't show what you claim it does.
bhikkhu
(10,708 posts)You can argue that they are all crap jobs, but 10 million new jobs is still a pretty hefty recovery. Wage growth is clearly needed, but I wouldn't piss on the good for not being the perfect.
Capt. Obvious
(9,002 posts)Much better than I was in 2009.
I didn't know I qualify for a top hat and monocle.
liberal_at_heart
(12,081 posts)the cost of living continues to go up and wages continue to stay stagnant.
Fred Sanders
(23,946 posts)imthevicar
(811 posts)in a grocery store has been hit with a shrink ray except the prices. 5 oz cans of tuna, smaller toilet paper rolls, 4 and 3.5 lb bags of sugar, 12.5 oz cans of coffee. Their is inflation, they just have gotten better at hiding it.
http://consumerist.com/category/grocery-shrink-ray/
Fred Sanders
(23,946 posts)Last edited Fri Mar 27, 2015, 09:57 AM - Edit history (1)
Inflation as measured the same way for 50 years is....ZERO.
imthevicar
(811 posts)I'm a socialist! Damned Proud of it! have been for 15 years. Not a dues paying type, but a student, (as we all are.).
And you would all do well to lean the real definition of a conspiracy theorist.
conspiracy theorist; Noun, Person or people who question the statements, actions, and motivations of KNOWN liars, Thieves, and swindlers.
My property taxes have gone up 20%, the cost of groceries have risen, (while the packaging has been smaller) in the last 10 years. My salary has not risen in over 5 years. Please don't bullshit me. I can spot it miles off.
I understand you BELIEVE in a Man. Let me tell you (from an old mans perspective.) it's a waste of time!
Fred Sanders
(23,946 posts)progree
(10,864 posts)[font color = blue]>>in a grocery store has been hit with a shrink ray except the prices. 5 oz cans of tuna, smaller toilet paper rolls, 4 and 3.5 lb bags of sugar, 12.5 oz cans of coffee. Their is inflation, they just have gotten better at hiding it.<< [/font]
Do you really think them thar guvmint bureaucrats that collect data for determining the CPI just look at the price of a can of coffee or whatever, without looking at how many ounces there are? Do you really think they are fooled by this?
Should we turn CPI data collecting over to the private sector so that we won't have incompetent government bureaucrats bungling this important job?
You fine folks like to preach that Inflation does not exist! I'd just like to remind you all, you live in a dream world.
If you think people who are all ready to sell you out to the TPP, are here for your benefit, Well good luck with that.
progree
(10,864 posts)are not fooled by slightly smaller cans with an ounce or two less. Nice strawman argument though.
Here is inflation (CPI-U) over the last 15 years:
http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/CUSR0000SA0
Here is the monthly changes:
http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/CUSR0000SA0&output_view=pct_1mth
Thanks to energy price drops, inflation in the past year (February 2015 compared to February 2014) is 0.0%. But that will of course start up again as energy prices level off and increase (as they already have begun to do). Indeed, the CPI is up 0.2% in February compared to January.
imthevicar
(811 posts)Sorry I have an allergy to Bullshit! Nice try, When you realize their both, Aside from Warren, Gleason, and Sanders. The Gop and the Dinos, As they say in flagrante delicto' (Nafta,the TPP, and all the war-mongering over the last 50 years come to mind,) You'll get it soon enough. But be my Guest, and do continue to delude yourself.
progree
(10,864 posts)So if you want to think bumbling guvmint bureaucrats are fooled by a slightly shrunken can of coffee, and that is your version of reality, then I'm sorry to hear that.
Capt. Obvious
(9,002 posts)liberal_at_heart
(12,081 posts)don't pay the bills.
Dont call me Shirley
(10,998 posts)My husband has been forced to take a paycut and loss of benefits since 2008. It is getting worse for us, not better.
liberal_at_heart
(12,081 posts)I do a lot of store sale shopping, using coupons, and warehouse shopping and it is still too expensive. So is the cost of rent, and heating. I'm so glad winter is over. The electric bill will be lower now. Thank goodness for Spring.
progree
(10,864 posts)[font color=blue]>>the cost of living continues to go up and wages continue to stay stagnant.<<[/font]
First of all, can you point me to any measure of income or wages that isn't definitely higher over any number of years you choose, when measured in raw (i.e. not inflation adjusted) dollars?
I know of none.
The only debate is whether the inflation-adjusted income/wage numbers are up, stagnant or down.
I get so damn sick, and I get so damn tired, of the meme about stagnant or declining wages, when the propagandist deliberately leaves out that they are talking about INFLATION-ADJUSTED numbers. When you call them out on it, the propagandist inevitably says everyone knows we're talking about inflation-adjusted numbers, since all that really matters is purchasing power.
But the propagandist -- at least the professional pundits and talk show hosts --know damn well that most people who hear that wages are stagnant or down think that plain old regular unadjusted dollars are what's being talked about.
And when the propagandist adds on that "the cost of living continues going up" after saying "wages are stagnant" (or down), then they are painting a picture in almost everyone's mind that they mean that raw unadjusted wages are stagnant (or down).
Roland99
(53,342 posts)just finagled a nice 30%+ raise to my current salary and now no more traveling every week out of town so I get to be with my family every day now!
Capt. Obvious
(9,002 posts)Back then I was on the brink of homelessness and working contract jobs whenever I could land one.
A little over 3 years ago I took a new career path and have been with the same company ever since doing completely different work I had no prior training for.
Roland99
(53,342 posts)I'm just thankful to be home with my family every day now.
Missed too much.
cheapdate
(3,811 posts)"Only" means all. Your statement is obviously false.
My good friend installs replacement windows. His business has picked up significantly since the recovery. The company I work for provides equipment and services to industry. Our business has picked up considerably since the recovery. We've hired extra staff.
I'm not a "supply-sider" and I understand the outrageous system, which we call our economy, for transferring wealth to the already wealthy.
But, the wealthy aren't the "only people" who have benefited in the recovery.
Capt. Obvious
(9,002 posts)I think that poor guy ate an air sandwich for lunch and is planning on eating a shadow for dinner.
liberal_at_heart
(12,081 posts)I am so done with you. You are going on ignore.
Capt. Obvious
(9,002 posts)1 package of ramen noodles
1 cup of crocodile tears
ND-Dem
(4,571 posts)cheapdate
(3,811 posts)that not everyone has a '92 Toyota and HBO.
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)and the previously unemployed that are now numbered in the millions that have gotten jobs.
Sheepshank
(12,504 posts)...the Republicans will claim credit for the recovery because they finally had a majority in the house after the midterms.
By their mere presence, they made the economy what it is. You and I both have read as much, I'm sure.
Warpy
(110,903 posts)In fact, some of them have had real downturns, like Wisconsin and Kansas. Their experience shows them that there is no recovery. Their myopia refuses to let them see that Democratically controlled states are recovering and that their own policies are the ones prolonging the recession.
They're morons, you know.
DesMoinesDem
(1,569 posts)Fred Sanders
(23,946 posts)the recovery.....put up a quarterly jobs and GDP graph......denying the recovery is what cons do....was the point of the OP.
DesMoinesDem
(1,569 posts)Because the president is a Democrat? Sorry, you may be a sheep, but I am not. I'm not afraid to point out the facts, and this aint no recovery.
Fred Sanders
(23,946 posts)jeff47
(26,549 posts)"A recovery" has technical meaning. It doesn't mean "I feel good about the economy".
Jobs are one of the last things to come back after a recession. They've finally started coming back.
eridani
(51,907 posts)Not to mention the much shittier wages.
Bandit
(21,475 posts)progree
(10,864 posts)[font color = blue]>>imo the economy is doing far better than when Obama first took office. By every single measure that is truth.<<[/font]
Almost. I track the main statistics beginning from the bottom of the job market in February 2010 (13 months after Obama took office)
Since the Payroll Job Recovery Began -- Last 60 months thru Feb 28, 2015: 2'15 - 2'10:
(This is the period from when continuous growth of payroll employment began, thru February 28, 2015)
+11,477,000 Payroll Jobs
+3,308,000 Labor Force
+9,716,000 Employed
-6,408,000 Unemployed
+0.8% Employment-To-Population Ratio aka Employment Rate
-2.1% LFPR (Labor Force Participation rate)
-4.3% Official (U-3) Unemployment rate
-6.0% U-6 unemployment rate (counts those who did any job-hunting activity even once in past 12 months)
-2,301,000 Part-Time Workers who want Full-Time Jobs (Table A-8's Part-Time For Economic Reasons)
-156,000 Part-Time Workers (Table A-9)
+10,056,000 Full-Time Workers (Table A-9)
+4.09% INFLATION ADJUSTED Weekly Earnings of Production and Non-Supervisory Workers
The links to the data above
# Payroll Jobs (Establishment Survey, http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/CES0000000001
# Labor Force http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNS11000000
# Employed http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNS12000000
# Unemployed http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNS13000000
# Employment-To-Population Ratio aka Employment Rate http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNS12300000
# LFPR (Labor Force Participation rate) http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNS11300000
# Unemployment rate http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNS14000000
# U-6 unemployment rate http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNS13327709
# Part-Time Workers who want Full-Time Jobs (Table A-8's Part-Time For Economic Reasons) http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNS12032194
# Part-Time Workers (Table A-9) http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNS12600000
# Full-Time Workers (Table A-9) http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNS12500000
# INFLATION ADJUSTED Weekly Earnings of Production and Non-Supervisory Workers http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/CES0500000031
eridani
(51,907 posts)--all the other stats would look pretty shitty.
progree
(10,864 posts)Seems to me that there is too much discussion in the media of the Labor Force Participation Rate (the employed plus the jobless people who have looked for work in the last 4 weeks, all divided by the population) and not enough attention to what seemingly matters more -- the Employment to Population Ratio. Why aren't we celebrating the increase in the percentage of the population that is employed -- a figure that has been (slowly) moving up since the job market bottom, despite the growing wave of baby boomer retirements?
(The Population in the above is the civilian non-institutional population age 16 and over, yes, including all elderly people, even centenarians)
>> [font color = blue]73. Labor force participation rate is down. If baby boomers weren't retiring en mass- --all the other stats would look pretty shitty. <<[/font]
You are partly right that the unemployment rates U-3 (down 4.3 percentage points from the job market bottom) and U-6 (down 6.0 percentage points) would not be down as much if more boomers were in the labor force (thus increasing the denominator in the unemployment rate). But I can't think of any reason that the other statistics in #25 would be worse off if more boomers had stayed in the labor force.
eridani
(51,907 posts)progree
(10,864 posts)As for how bad wages are -- here is the average hourly wage of production and non-supervisory employees, adjusted for inflation (and expressed in chained 1982-1984 dollars)
http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/CES0500000032
Note this statistic does not include CEOs or any other kind of executive. This doesn't include business owners. This doesn't include managers or supervisors. These are all people working for someone else for a paycheck who have noone reporting to them. These are not the financial and economic glitteratti. And yet they are doing better than under Bush, even better than under Clinton.
Here's the series without inflation-adjustment: http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/CES0500000008
eridani
(51,907 posts)People perceive the current economy as shitty because it is shitty. The chart doesn't mention anything about health care costs doubling since 2000.
progree
(10,864 posts)Last edited Tue Mar 31, 2015, 10:54 PM - Edit history (1)
I'm not saying the economy is non-shitty, just that its improved significantly from the lows of 2009-2010. But that was a very deep sucky hole.
eridani
(51,907 posts)Granted, Obama could have done more about this had he not been prevented from doing so by Republicans.
progree
(10,864 posts)It's true we're not recovered to the level of the housing bubble years or even the tech bubble years in most statistics. But pre-crash was the height of the sick feverish unsustainable housing bubble economy when people were using their homes as ATMs to the tune of hundreds of billions of dollars a year. And the financial sector was booming like crazy on derivatives. I don't think that's the economy we should want or compare to or pine and sigh for.
The past year has been particularly heartening (for the most part):
Over the last year (last 12 months):
+3,296,000 Payroll Jobs (Establishment Survey, CES0000000001)
+1,314,000 Labor Force
+2,996,000 Employed
-1,682,000 Unemployed
+0.5% Employment-To-Population Ratio aka Employment Rate
-0.2% LFPR (Labor Force Participation rate)
-1.2% Unemployment rate
-1.6% U-6 unemployment rate (It includes anyone that looked for work even once in the past year)
-569,000 Part-Time Workers who want Full-Time Jobs (Table A-8's Part-Time For Economic Reasons)
+ 89,000 Part-Time Workers (Table A-9)
+2,975,000 Full-Time Workers (Table A-9)
+3.19% INFLATION ADJUSTED Weekly Earnings of Production and Non-Supervisory Workers
I also note that the U.S. is about the only developed economy that is showing decent growth. Japan wavers between recession and being barely out of recession. Europe is just barely above water growth-wise.
As for how bad wages are -- here is the average hourly wage of production and non-supervisory employees, adjusted for inflation (and expressed in chained 1982-1984 dollars)
http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/CES0500000032
Note this statistic does not include CEOs or any other kind of executive. This doesn't include business owners. This doesn't include managers or supervisors. These are all people working for someone else for a paycheck who have noone reporting to them. These are not the financial and economic glitteratti. And yet they are doing better than under Bush, even better than under Clinton.
Here's the series without inflation-adjustment: http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/CES0500000008
Man from Pickens
(1,713 posts)which is coming right back out with the crashed oil price, none of those shale projects are economically viable at today's prices and they're being shut down in huge numbers
progree
(10,864 posts)in the economy because of ... low oil prices. People who spend less money filling their tanks with gas have more money to spend elsewhere, creating jobs in those other sectors.
That said, I concede that inflation-adjusted wages have gotten a boost in the last several months thanks to reduced CPI growth (actually negative in Nov., Dec., and Jan.) due to falling energy costs. That's a one-time event we're probably not going to see repeated, so we'll lose that tail wind to inflation-adjusted wages. Anyway, we'll see.
I think -- even if inflation-adjusted wages were merely flat -- the fact that we have 11.5 million more jobs than at the jobs bottom in February 2010 is a definite recovery by any definition (and not just for the 1%, they already had jobs/income), and a 0.8% growth in the employment to population ratio despite the surge of baby boomer retirements. And its a heck of a lot better than any other developed economy is doing.
Were recovering, but true, we're not "recovered". But if "recovered" means back to the sick, feverish, unsustainable housing bubble years, then, no thanks.
jeff47
(26,549 posts)Man from Pickens
(1,713 posts)You have to average in massive gains being made by the one percent with the stagnation being experienced by everyone else.
Filter out how well the 1% are doing - because frankly no good person should waste a moment fretting about their welfare - and there is no recovery.
If you are promoting a recovery you are extolling the virtues of increased wealth disparity, because that's what this "recovery" is, over 100% of it.
jeff47
(26,549 posts)Man from Pickens
(1,713 posts)at least as far as any regular, non-privileged person is concerned
jeff47
(26,549 posts)Man from Pickens
(1,713 posts)Go ahead. Once you do it should be obvious that the "technical meaning" has very little real-world meaning to 99% of the population.
ND-Dem
(4,571 posts)LanternWaste
(37,748 posts)Like you, I used to call people 'sheep' too merely for holding a different opinion. It allowed me to feel much, much more clever than I really was. Thankfully, grade school was a long time ago, and we've since dispensed with the self-validating churlishness of our childhoods...
truebluegreen
(9,033 posts)When was the second?
raven mad
(4,940 posts)There's a decent article about both economic "panics" and major U.S. depressions here, as well as brief but good explanations behind each: http://247wallst.com/investing/2010/09/09/the-13-worst-recessions-depressions-and-panics-in-american-history/2/
ND-Dem
(4,571 posts)Capt. Obvious
(9,002 posts)DemocratSinceBirth
(99,705 posts)Viva Obama !
ND-Dem
(4,571 posts)staggerleem
(469 posts)That's what "recovery" looks like when the only ones experiencing it are those who need it LEAST!
liberal_at_heart
(12,081 posts)All they care about is how many jobs were added during a Democratic administration.
ND-Dem
(4,571 posts)Spitfire of ATJ
(32,723 posts)abelenkpe
(9,933 posts)Improves? Democrats should embrace this on a national level.
It's not like rich people weren't still rich when the top marginal rate was 90 percent.
ErikJ
(6,335 posts)It made the No Income, No job, Assets Liar subprime loans legal in all 50 states. Which the big banks then bundled into toxic derivatives.
Cha
(295,903 posts)rock
(13,218 posts)They want to take credit for it too!
Flo Mingo
(492 posts)But only if you add "in China".
So...........Republicans are better at creating jobs...........in China.
There. I agree.
Man from Pickens
(1,713 posts)He's been in a position of privilege so long that it doesn't matter to him if a job is making tacos or engineering infrastructure, a job is a job. It's not like he is going to be working any of the new, low-wage jobs that are replacing good ones.
Plain fact is that wages are going nowhere, and until they do, there is no recovery for the vast majority of people in this country.
stevenleser
(32,886 posts)Man from Pickens
(1,713 posts)without a call to authority fallacy
well, guess what - all the excuse-making in the world doesn't make wages rise faster than inflation
so as long as you keep that attitude you should not be surprised at all if you find you convince no one that there is some kind of recovery in progress
stevenleser
(32,886 posts)Just like a Doctor is more credible on medical issues than a non-Doctor.
stevenleser
(32,886 posts)This fallacy is committed when the person in question is not a legitimate authority on the subject.
.
.
.
This sort of reasoning is fallacious when the person in question is not an expert. In such cases the reasoning is flawed because the fact that an unqualified person makes a claim does not provide any justification for the claim. The claim could be true, but the fact that an unqualified person made the claim does not provide any rational reason to accept the claim as true.
Since this sort of reasoning is fallacious only when the person is not a legitimate authority in a particular context, it is necessary to provide some acceptable standards of assessment. The following standards are widely accepted:
The person has sufficient expertise in the subject matter in question.
----------------------------------
As Krugman is an economics professor at Princeton and a Nobel Laureate, your attempt to proclaim my statement an appeal to authority fallacy is invalid.
Man from Pickens
(1,713 posts)Have a Wiki article: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_authority
Fallacious examples of using the appeal include any appeal to authority used in the context of logical reasoning, and appealing to the position of an authority or authorities to dismiss evidence, as authorities can come to the wrong judgments through error, bias, dishonesty, or falling prey to groupthink. Thus, the appeal to authority is not a generally reliable argument for establishing facts.
The credentials of the authority are immaterial, and appealing to them is a logical fallacy.
stevenleser
(32,886 posts)your use of the fallacy still fails.
Any by the way, evidence means links with a source that directly refutes his contentions specifically, not just your say so.
staggerleem
(469 posts)He's just pointing out that on SOME level, things ARE improving - and that the Right denies even THAT much!
Man from Pickens
(1,713 posts)and they are stagnant and not showing any signs of improvement
staggerleem
(469 posts)The company I worked for (and STILL work for, BTW - I started this job the day Bill Clinton was inaugurated) was in trouble, and the engineering staff were all requested to take a 20% cut in pay. We were also given the option of only working 4 days a week, but the owners (this company is small, and privately held, and NOBODY puts in more time or sweat than the owners) pointed out that the only way out of the hole we were in was sexy, new products, and since we were the guys who'd be designing them, as much time as we were willing to give would be very appreciated.
A couple of our engineers did, in fact, quit. Most of us hung on, and put in our usual 40+ hours a week for 20% less cash. I can't speak for anyone else on staff, but just this year, I'm starting to earn just slightly more than I did in 2008.
Yes, this is absolutely anecdotal, and essentially the opposite of "evidence". It's just MY story - but there are hundreds of similar ones. Slowly (TOO slowly, in the minds of most) things ARE getting better.
It took Dubya & his cronies a full 8 years to REALLY trash the American Dream for most of us. So far, we've only given the Democrats 6 years to fix it. Did you ever have an auto accident? How long did it take to wreck the car? Under a minute, I'd bet. How long did it take to get it FIXED? Even if we ignore the days the car sits at the body shop waiting for someone to start the work, we're still talking a day or two - 8 to 16 hours - to fix the damage done in a minute. You think we should be able to repair a nation and it's economy faster that that? Dream on, Pickens-boy!
sendero
(28,552 posts)... yes, they are improving.
As long as folks don't use the word "recovery" I'm ok with it. Because "recovery" implies getting back to where you were, and that is not happening. Not this year, not next year, probably not ever.
progree
(10,864 posts)counts as being a recovery underway.
I think -- even if inflation-adjusted wages were merely flat (instead of being higher than under Clinton or G.W. Bush,- see #23) the fact that we have 11.5 million more jobs than at the jobs bottom in February 2010 is a definite recovery by any definition (and not just for the 1%, they already had jobs/income), and a 0.8% growth in the employment to population ratio despite the surge of baby boomer retirements. And its a heck of a lot better than any other developed economy is doing.
Since the Payroll Job Recovery Began -- Last 60 months thru Feb 28, 2015: 2'15 - 2'10:
(This is the period from when continuous growth of payroll employment began, thru February 28, 2015)
+11,477,000 Payroll Jobs
+3,308,000 Labor Force
+9,716,000 Employed
-6,408,000 Unemployed
+0.8% Employment-To-Population Ratio aka Employment Rate
-2.1% LFPR (Labor Force Participation rate)
-4.3% Official (U-3) Unemployment rate
-6.0% U-6 unemployment rate (counts those who did any job-hunting activity even once in past 12 months)
-2,301,000 Part-Time Workers who want Full-Time Jobs (Table A-8's Part-Time For Economic Reasons)
-156,000 Part-Time Workers (Table A-9)
+10,056,000 Full-Time Workers (Table A-9)
+4.09% INFLATION ADJUSTED Weekly Earnings of Production and Non-Supervisory Workers
(See #25 for links to all of the above data).
We're recovering, but true, we're not "recovered". But if "recovered" means back to the sick, feverish, unsustainable housing bubble years, then, no thanks.
sendero
(28,552 posts)... for a long time and I've lost my enthusiasm for that deal but I will make a couple of points.
"Inflation adjusted" is only meaningful is actual inflation numbers are used. Nobody who is paying attention thinks our "CPI" is even in the ballpark of accurate. Nor are the GDP numbers.
I'll tell you what I tell everyone here, when the ZIRP is ended then and only then will our economy be approaching anything resembling a "recovery". ZIRP is the Fed's life-support equivalent to a respirator in the ICU. And it is of itself doing plenty of damage as we speak.
All those fancy cooked numbers do not impress me, call me when interest rates are back to something like normal.
BTW - the state of the economy doesn't have much to do with Obama IMHO. The whole world economy, especially Europe and China, but including many other regions, is softening as we speak. And softening from an already pretty weak level (well except for China). The problems we face are huge and systemic, and the world is so interconnected we cannot "recover" on our own any more.
progree
(10,864 posts)[font color = blue] >>"Inflation adjusted" is only meaningful is actual inflation numbers are used. Nobody who is paying attention thinks our "CPI" is even in the ballpark of accurate. Nor are the GDP numbers.<< [/font]
Ahh. An inflation - truther. Ohhhhhhh, thank you for paying attention!
I talk about this one in my section "Beware the tricks of the economic pundits out there" in the post in my sigline.
(7). Using government statistics and trickery (see techniques in http://www.democraticunderground.com/111622439) to make some point, and when you call them on the trickery, and give them the correct information, they tell you they don't trust government statistics! In other words, they are fine with government statistics and use them (or studies derived from them) if they can twist them to fit their viewpoint, otherwise, they don't trust them
#######################################
If you don't like inflation-adjusted wages, well here are the raw not-inflation-adjusted numbers for production and non-supervisory workers:
http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/CES0500000008
stevenleser
(32,886 posts)sendero
(28,552 posts).... but Zero Interest Rate Policy is the economy on life support, if you can't believe that then you are out of touch with reality.
progree
(10,864 posts)pampango
(24,692 posts)republican Texas.
He is not saying that it is a great recovery or that everything is fine. He is ridiculing the republican mantra that economic growth is only possible by cutting taxes, regulations and weakening unions. He uses a comparison of California and Texas to demonstrate this.
Nowhere does he say that the recovery is fantastic or that it is reaching the people is should. He simply is disproving the republican contention that job growth cannot occur with high taxes.
uponit7771
(90,225 posts)winter is coming
(11,785 posts)stevenleser
(32,886 posts)winter is coming
(11,785 posts)The media and politicians tell us that the economy's doing better, that there are jobs being created. Observable reality tells us that the new jobs are seldom of the same calibre as the old ones and that newspaper articles don't pay the rent or buy groceries.
Economists care about the economic indicators, but most ordinary people want to know if they can make their bills and whether anything will be left over afterwards. Wanna tout the recovery? Knock yourself out, but happy talk won't go very far with the people not experiencing it.
Fred Sanders
(23,946 posts)Capt. Obvious
(9,002 posts)He's lighting his cigars with Ben Franklins while the rest of us are murdering each other over that dead rat in the alley.
Must be good to be rich Paul.
The Jungle 1
(4,552 posts)Pa is the perfect example of failed republican economic policy. Republicans had complete control of our state for four years. Our economy is in the tank, we are in deep debt and we are 49th in job creation. Republicans got nothing done and the state is suffering. Funny thing the tax cuts did not create any jobs or help our economy one bit.
Pa. does not stand alone with these republican economic failures. Republicans need to answer for these failures. We all need to ask why their economic policies are failing and what they will do differently.
LadyHawkAZ
(6,199 posts)Almost as if I'd heard it somewhere recently...
MFrohike
(1,980 posts)Krugman's bored cheer-on-the-home-team shit is way past the sell date. He's selling a dubious story and he knows it. He can yap all day about jobs growth, but I wouldn't be cheering where most of the growth has occurred. As Dean Baker has noted, the greatest amount of openings, and growth, in employment over the last few years is in retail.
If Rand Paul and the other idiots are right, rest assured that it has nothing to do with astute analysis. It's nothing but a coincidence. If 30 million people got laid off overnight under one of them, they'd claim the employment situation had unprecedented opportunity. What they say can safely be disregarded, in terms of whether to believe their analysis, because it's almost always wrong. They might, and there are troubling signs underneath the headline numbers, be right. Just know they have no clue why if they are.
As an aside, criticism of Krugman is usually ineptly rebutted with the tired line of "he has a Nobel Prize." Cool. So do Milton Friedman and Friedrich Hayek. If their astounding success at being wrong nearly 100% of the time is the standard for that prize, maybe the good professor's defenders should pipe down about it. It's not for nothing that Gunnar Myrdal, co-winner with Hayek in 1974, called for its abolition due to the aforementioned awards.
Gothmog
(143,999 posts)Kalidurga
(14,177 posts)DCBob
(24,689 posts)Which is unfortunate as Krugman states its significant to note that the economy can thrive quite nicely along with liberal policies. The disgruntled left should be singing the praises of the Obama/Democratic economic recovery if they are truely interested in pushing for A more progressive goverment.
eridani
(51,907 posts)Saying things are4 great when most people are either treading water or activly losing ground is NOT a good way to get jobs.
Yorktown
(2,884 posts)No matter who, no matter what they do, it's hard times ahead.
The debt has gone too far (initiated by Reagan, carried on by all). There will be Hell to pay.
(with a special mention to GW's truly idiotic economic policies)
The stock markets are way overvalued (by half?). Obama's QE contributed to that bubble.
The long term Kondratieff innovation boom and bust cycle is nearing bust soon.
All in all, repent, the end is nigh