|
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please.In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up! NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action. |
On July 06 2013 04:35 Phelix wrote:Show nested quote +On July 06 2013 04:25 JonnyBNoHo wrote:On July 06 2013 04:01 aksfjh wrote:On July 06 2013 00:19 JonnyBNoHo wrote:Job Growth Posts Large Gain in June; Rate Holds
U.S. job growth accelerated in June thanks to a big jump in hospitality and service workers, according to a report that is likely to trigger more debate about how aggressively the Federal Reserve will begin pulling back on monetary easing.
Unemployment steadied at 7.6 percent for the month, as nonfarm payrolls grew by 195,000, according to a closely watched Labor Department report Friday. Economists expected 165,000 more jobs and a decline in the unemployment rate to 7.5 percent. ...
Revisions pushed previous months' reports considerably higher: April's tally rose 50,000 to 199,000, while the May count grew 20,000 to 195,000. LinkVery good numbers. Still awful numbers. At this rate, we'll reach full employment (figuring in underemployed) in a decade. But we're not going into another recession, so I guess that's cause for celebration... Oh, don't be such a downer. Best Jan - June job growth of the recovery with room for more upward revisions and no signs of a summer slowdown. We may actually get that pickup in second half growth this time around. Well, in the article, it says that the majority of the gains were in the hospitality industry (bartenders and waitresses), so it's not like these are stable, high-paying jobs that workers would most likely want after school for the younger generation. Instead, it's more of the temp-work, service industry jobs that serve as an gap for those higher-paying jobs. Also, no one knows how much unemployment will increase and the effects of said unemployment will be once QE3 has a definite signal to an end (investors are reading Bernanke saying that QE3 will be speculated to end in late 2014); after all, months of 85 billion dollars being pumped into the economy must have had a positive effect in the economy. There were jobs created in lots of different industries. Hospitality was +75K, professional and business services was +53K, retail +37K, health care +20K, financial +17K. It's a mix as far a well paying jobs goes, and that's pretty normal.
|
On July 06 2013 06:09 aksfjh wrote:Show nested quote +On July 06 2013 05:26 Rassy wrote: The 85 billions a month was not pumped into the economy. The monney was used to buy mortgage backed securitys and bonds on the market and off the counter, this to allow a few selected big bond and mbs holders to sell their holdings at record heights before they would crash due to the rising interest. It was a 85b/month (1 trillion totall) hand out to the rich/banks/investment funds for wich the whole country will pay due to inflation. My guess is 3 years tops till this monney has made its way into the normal economy and inflation will rise to 5% and maybe more.
It would be interesting to see how much profit/loss the fed has on these securitys wich where purchased with printed monney, my guess is a loss of at least 10% in 1 year from now. But i think these figures will never become public. Where is that inflation promised from the program 4 years ago? We're at <2% now, with no signs of acceleration.
This program is alot bigger then the previous program, and also different. Besides that:the official inflation figures are extremely skewed and dont show the real inflation. If i see that people working at barts cleaning cars make 75k a year "wich is justified because they live in an expensive area" then i say,there is your inflation. 75k/year needed to maintain a lower middle class livestyle for unskilled labour.
I will make this prediction, within 3 years even the official heavily skewd inflation will be at 5%. If we are both still on this forum in 3 years,you can come back at me and say i was wrong or right :p
|
MADISON, Wis. (AP) — Gov. Scott Walker quietly signed a contentious Republican bill Friday that would require women seeking abortions to undergo an ultrasound and ban doctors who lack admitting privileges at nearby hospitals from performing the procedures.
Opponents contend legislators shouldn’t force women to undergo any medical procedure and the bill will force at least two abortion clinics where providers lack admitting privileges to shut their doors.
The Republican-controlled Legislature passed the bill in mid-June. Walker, a Republican, could have chosen to sign it at any time since then but decided to do it on Friday in the middle of the long 4th of July holiday weekend. The measure’s opponents accused him of trying to bury news of the signing.
“That’s his prerogative. He’s the governor,” said Planned Parenthood of Wisconsin attorney Lester Pines. “But he’s not going to win a profile in courage award.”
Walker did not sign the bill in public, instead issuing a press release early in the afternoon including the bill in a list of 17 other measures he signed earlier the day.
“This bill improves a woman’s ability to make an informed choice that will protect her physical and mental health now and in the future,” the blurb noting the signing said.
Pines said Friday he plans to file a federal lawsuit with the American Civil Liberties Union arguing the law is unconstitutional. The lawsuit will include a request for a restraining order blocking the law from taking effect.
Source
|
On July 06 2013 07:17 JonnyBNoHo wrote:Show nested quote +On July 06 2013 04:35 Phelix wrote:On July 06 2013 04:25 JonnyBNoHo wrote:On July 06 2013 04:01 aksfjh wrote:On July 06 2013 00:19 JonnyBNoHo wrote:Job Growth Posts Large Gain in June; Rate Holds
U.S. job growth accelerated in June thanks to a big jump in hospitality and service workers, according to a report that is likely to trigger more debate about how aggressively the Federal Reserve will begin pulling back on monetary easing.
Unemployment steadied at 7.6 percent for the month, as nonfarm payrolls grew by 195,000, according to a closely watched Labor Department report Friday. Economists expected 165,000 more jobs and a decline in the unemployment rate to 7.5 percent. ...
Revisions pushed previous months' reports considerably higher: April's tally rose 50,000 to 199,000, while the May count grew 20,000 to 195,000. LinkVery good numbers. Still awful numbers. At this rate, we'll reach full employment (figuring in underemployed) in a decade. But we're not going into another recession, so I guess that's cause for celebration... Oh, don't be such a downer. Best Jan - June job growth of the recovery with room for more upward revisions and no signs of a summer slowdown. We may actually get that pickup in second half growth this time around. Well, in the article, it says that the majority of the gains were in the hospitality industry (bartenders and waitresses), so it's not like these are stable, high-paying jobs that workers would most likely want after school for the younger generation. Instead, it's more of the temp-work, service industry jobs that serve as an gap for those higher-paying jobs. Also, no one knows how much unemployment will increase and the effects of said unemployment will be once QE3 has a definite signal to an end (investors are reading Bernanke saying that QE3 will be speculated to end in late 2014); after all, months of 85 billion dollars being pumped into the economy must have had a positive effect in the economy. There were jobs created in lots of different industries. Hospitality was +75K, professional and business services was +53K, retail +37K, health care +20K, financial +17K. It's a mix as far a well paying jobs goes, and that's pretty normal. Most of the job losses that were caused by the financial crisis were mid-wage jobs and the recovery for the job gains were filled by low-wage jobs and temp work. People would like mid-wage jobs that offer mobility in the workforce, but can only find the low-wage jobs, or resort to temp-work to fill out their work experiences. There's a reason why people have called the gains in employment a McJob recovery, or a jobless recovery (earlier in the recession).
NELP Article on August 2012
|
Particularly with Q2 reports so abysmal, I'm not full of hope with June jobs numbers. Quite the opposite:
From the media to Wall Street, June's jobs report is being spun as a major positive, a sign the economy is getting back on track. Maybe the pundits should look at the actual numbers, which are abysmal.
aclbfTo hear some of them, the 195,000 payroll jobs added for the month while the unemployment rate stayed at 7.6% were a big deal. One investment house called it a "very good report." Another termed it "solid."
Really? Let's take a little closer look at the numbers.
The total number of payroll jobs in the economy, at 135.9 million, is still 1.6% below 5-1/2 years ago, when the recession began. We're not even back at scratch.
At June's pace of 195,000 new jobs a month, it will take 11 months to get back to where we were in 2007. If you factor in monthly growth of 120,000 in the labor force, that will barely make a dent in unemployment.
In short, this jobs recovery isn't solid. It's pathetic.
It's even worse when you consider all of the net addition to June jobs — repeat, all — were part time. Compared with the 360,000 part-time positions created, full-time employment shrank by 240,000.
Year to date, only 130,000 full-time jobs have been added to our economy. The rest of the jobs — 557,000 — have been part time.
And tucked deep into the jobs report was this little tidbit: The underemployment rate, which measures those working in a job for which they're overqualified, or working part-time when they really want full-time work, shot up from 13.8% to 14.3%.
This isn't a solid jobs report. It's a crisis.
A new report from McKinsey & Co. says 45% of college graduates today have jobs that don't require college degrees. A generation of young, educated workers — our future human capital — is being wasted on waiting tables and selling shoes. Full article IBD, emphasis in quoted material mine
I'm not cheering.
|
On July 06 2013 07:24 Rassy wrote:Show nested quote +On July 06 2013 06:09 aksfjh wrote:On July 06 2013 05:26 Rassy wrote: The 85 billions a month was not pumped into the economy. The monney was used to buy mortgage backed securitys and bonds on the market and off the counter, this to allow a few selected big bond and mbs holders to sell their holdings at record heights before they would crash due to the rising interest. It was a 85b/month (1 trillion totall) hand out to the rich/banks/investment funds for wich the whole country will pay due to inflation. My guess is 3 years tops till this monney has made its way into the normal economy and inflation will rise to 5% and maybe more.
It would be interesting to see how much profit/loss the fed has on these securitys wich where purchased with printed monney, my guess is a loss of at least 10% in 1 year from now. But i think these figures will never become public. Where is that inflation promised from the program 4 years ago? We're at <2% now, with no signs of acceleration. This program is alot bigger then the previous program, and also different. Besides that:the official inflation figures are extremely skewed and dont show the real inflation. If i see that people working at barts cleaning cars make 75k a year "wich is justified because they live in an expensive area" then i say,there is your inflation. 75k/year needed to maintain a lower middle class livestyle for unskilled labour. I will make this prediction, within 3 years even the official heavily skewd inflation will be at 5%. If we are both still on this forum in 3 years,you can come back at me and say i was wrong or right :p It takes 75k for a middle class life in the 2nd most expensive city in the US. Definitely not a nationwide trend, and SF has been like this for a decade. Take a look at stuff like billion prices project for validation on government inflation numbers.
I'll make sure to bookmark your post and hold you accountable! If you were in the Dallas area I'd make a pizza/beer bet with you.
|
On July 06 2013 07:24 Rassy wrote:Show nested quote +On July 06 2013 06:09 aksfjh wrote:On July 06 2013 05:26 Rassy wrote: The 85 billions a month was not pumped into the economy. The monney was used to buy mortgage backed securitys and bonds on the market and off the counter, this to allow a few selected big bond and mbs holders to sell their holdings at record heights before they would crash due to the rising interest. It was a 85b/month (1 trillion totall) hand out to the rich/banks/investment funds for wich the whole country will pay due to inflation. My guess is 3 years tops till this monney has made its way into the normal economy and inflation will rise to 5% and maybe more.
It would be interesting to see how much profit/loss the fed has on these securitys wich where purchased with printed monney, my guess is a loss of at least 10% in 1 year from now. But i think these figures will never become public. Where is that inflation promised from the program 4 years ago? We're at <2% now, with no signs of acceleration. This program is alot bigger then the previous program, and also different. Besides that:the official inflation figures are extremely skewed and dont show the real inflation. If i see that people working at barts cleaning cars make 75k a year "wich is justified because they live in an expensive area" then i say,there is your inflation. 75k/year needed to maintain a lower middle class livestyle for unskilled labour. I will make this prediction, within 3 years even the official heavily skewd inflation will be at 5%. If we are both still on this forum in 3 years,you can come back at me and say i was wrong or right :p http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/06/29/the-always-wrong-club/ http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/06/28/three-unsayable-words/ http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/04/01/billion-price-update-2/
|
http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/04/01/billion-price-update-2/
Ty for posting a link wich supports my statement.
Cpi and bpp at 3 and 2%, both having peaked at 4% 1 year ago. A trend of higher highs and higher lows over the past 3 years. Only 1% to go from the high and we are at 5 %. Tell me honestly, if you look at that chart:does it seem that unlikely that cpi and bpp will make a peak at 5% or higher in the coming 3 years?.
Have to admit your other posts also have merit,manny economists where wrong in their doom precictions about qe at least up till now, Imo this can be explained because the monney is still in the hands of verry few people (instead of inside the economy) It takes a long time for this monney to dripple down into the consumer economy since rich people and institutions only consume a fraction of their income. The extreme rise of exclusive real estate prices over the past decade imo shows that there already is verry high inflation in products for the verry rich people.
aksfjh United States. July 06 2013 08:37. Posts 3835 Will see in 3 years, if you are right then i will send you a bear by mail in 3 years
|
On July 06 2013 22:58 Rassy wrote:http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/04/01/billion-price-update-2/Ty for posting a link wich supports my statement. Cpi and bpp at 3 and 2%, both having peaked at 4% 1 year ago. A trend of higher highs and higher lows over the past 3 years. Only 1% to go from the high and we are at 5 %. Tell me honestly, if you look at that chart:does it seem that unlikely that cpi and bpp will make a peak at 5% or higher in the coming 3 years?. Have to admit your other posts also have merit,manny economists where wrong in their doom precictions about qe at least up till now, Imo this can be explained because the monney is still in the hands of verry few people (instead of inside the economy) It takes a long time for this monney to dripple down into the consumer economy since rich people and institutions only consume a fraction of their income. The extreme rise of exclusive real estate prices over the past decade imo shows that there already is verry high inflation in products for the verry rich people. aksfjh United States. July 06 2013 08:37. Posts 3835 Will see in 3 years, if you are right then i will send you a bear by mail in 3 years data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/44632/446320620b2797481b98f0248bf47d03f83e2600" alt="" Please send beer. I have no need for bears!
|
On July 06 2013 08:34 Danglars wrote:Particularly with Q2 reports so abysmal, I'm not full of hope with June jobs numbers. Quite the opposite: Show nested quote +From the media to Wall Street, June's jobs report is being spun as a major positive, a sign the economy is getting back on track. Maybe the pundits should look at the actual numbers, which are abysmal.
aclbfTo hear some of them, the 195,000 payroll jobs added for the month while the unemployment rate stayed at 7.6% were a big deal. One investment house called it a "very good report." Another termed it "solid."
Really? Let's take a little closer look at the numbers.
The total number of payroll jobs in the economy, at 135.9 million, is still 1.6% below 5-1/2 years ago, when the recession began. We're not even back at scratch.
At June's pace of 195,000 new jobs a month, it will take 11 months to get back to where we were in 2007. If you factor in monthly growth of 120,000 in the labor force, that will barely make a dent in unemployment.
In short, this jobs recovery isn't solid. It's pathetic.
It's even worse when you consider all of the net addition to June jobs — repeat, all — were part time. Compared with the 360,000 part-time positions created, full-time employment shrank by 240,000.
Year to date, only 130,000 full-time jobs have been added to our economy. The rest of the jobs — 557,000 — have been part time.
And tucked deep into the jobs report was this little tidbit: The underemployment rate, which measures those working in a job for which they're overqualified, or working part-time when they really want full-time work, shot up from 13.8% to 14.3%.
This isn't a solid jobs report. It's a crisis.
A new report from McKinsey & Co. says 45% of college graduates today have jobs that don't require college degrees. A generation of young, educated workers — our future human capital — is being wasted on waiting tables and selling shoes. Full article IBD, emphasis in quoted material mineI'm not cheering.
Glad to see I'm not the only one unimpressed with the report. Service sector or gtfo doesn't sound very optimistic to me.
|
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
a direct result of lel inventive management techniques. in times when employers have leverage over labor permanent positions gets cut in favor of temp positions. there's a glut of desperate jobseekers out there so take advantage.
a part of the job loss may just be the result of this power play, and like in a ratchet it'll stick.
|
On July 06 2013 08:34 Danglars wrote:Particularly with Q2 reports so abysmal, I'm not full of hope with June jobs numbers. Quite the opposite: Show nested quote +From the media to Wall Street, June's jobs report is being spun as a major positive, a sign the economy is getting back on track. Maybe the pundits should look at the actual numbers, which are abysmal.
aclbfTo hear some of them, the 195,000 payroll jobs added for the month while the unemployment rate stayed at 7.6% were a big deal. One investment house called it a "very good report." Another termed it "solid."
Really? Let's take a little closer look at the numbers.
The total number of payroll jobs in the economy, at 135.9 million, is still 1.6% below 5-1/2 years ago, when the recession began. We're not even back at scratch.
At June's pace of 195,000 new jobs a month, it will take 11 months to get back to where we were in 2007. If you factor in monthly growth of 120,000 in the labor force, that will barely make a dent in unemployment.
In short, this jobs recovery isn't solid. It's pathetic.
It's even worse when you consider all of the net addition to June jobs — repeat, all — were part time. Compared with the 360,000 part-time positions created, full-time employment shrank by 240,000.
Year to date, only 130,000 full-time jobs have been added to our economy. The rest of the jobs — 557,000 — have been part time.
And tucked deep into the jobs report was this little tidbit: The underemployment rate, which measures those working in a job for which they're overqualified, or working part-time when they really want full-time work, shot up from 13.8% to 14.3%.
This isn't a solid jobs report. It's a crisis.
A new report from McKinsey & Co. says 45% of college graduates today have jobs that don't require college degrees. A generation of young, educated workers — our future human capital — is being wasted on waiting tables and selling shoes. Full article IBD, emphasis in quoted material mineI'm not cheering. I agree with their assessment of the numbers, but not the cause. QE has been extremely helpful by reducing costs of borrowing for everybody, and the recovery has tapered with the dwindling of the stimulus.
|
On July 06 2013 22:58 Rassy wrote:http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/04/01/billion-price-update-2/Ty for posting a link wich supports my statement. Cpi and bpp at 3 and 2%, both having peaked at 4% 1 year ago. A trend of higher highs and higher lows over the past 3 years. Only 1% to go from the high and we are at 5 %. Tell me honestly, if you look at that chart:does it seem that unlikely that cpi and bpp will make a peak at 5% or higher in the coming 3 years?. Have to admit your other posts also have merit,manny economists where wrong in their doom precictions about qe at least up till now, Imo this can be explained because the monney is still in the hands of verry few people (instead of inside the economy) It takes a long time for this monney to dripple down into the consumer economy since rich people and institutions only consume a fraction of their income. The extreme rise of exclusive real estate prices over the past decade imo shows that there already is verry high inflation in products for the verry rich people. aksfjh United States. July 06 2013 08:37. Posts 3835 Will see in 3 years, if you are right then i will send you a bear by mail in 3 years data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/44632/446320620b2797481b98f0248bf47d03f83e2600" alt="" You contradict yourself by saying that QE caused a price increase in 2010 and then saying that it takes time for inflation to come. That price increase in 2010 was quickly followed by a price decrease. Don't hold your breath, inflation isn't coming anytime soon, it's almost 1% and falling.
Conveniently, Krugman also has a post today about all the ways people have been wrong about inflation: http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/07/06/regions-of-derpistan/
|
So apparently the NSA also did mass surveillance on Brazil and it's citizens? Cat 5 shit storm incoming if true.
|
On July 07 2013 10:45 {CC}StealthBlue wrote: So apparently the NSA also did mass surveillance on Brazil and it's citizens? Cat 5 shit storm incoming if true. Recently? If so, with all the protests going on that would make perfect sense.
|
On July 07 2013 10:45 {CC}StealthBlue wrote: So apparently the NSA also did mass surveillance on Brazil and it's citizens? Cat 5 shit storm incoming if true. That's really unfortunate timing, lol. I mean, Brazil was really mad at their government, right? Maybe this will help them move their anger at something else?
Also, it's vs. its
|
On July 07 2013 13:40 tshi wrote:Show nested quote +On July 07 2013 10:45 {CC}StealthBlue wrote: So apparently the NSA also did mass surveillance on Brazil and it's citizens? Cat 5 shit storm incoming if true. That's really unfortunate timing, lol. I mean, Brazil was really mad at their government, right? Maybe this will help them move their anger at something else? Also, it's vs. its With how much information Stealth graces this thread with, he can make any manner of grammatical error he wants.
|
|
Build a Prison Close a School: 54 schools closed in Chicago (88% black), 23 closed in Philadelphia (81% black), 26 in New York (60% black). What’s the difference between the Democrats and Republicans again I forgot? Hundreds of teachers and school staff are being laid off in two of the largest cities in the country — both run by Democrats. In Chicago and Philadelphia, a total of 4,633 people, including many teachers, will lose their jobs.
Both cities, run by Democrats, claim they are closing schools because they need the money. Yet near both cities, money for prisons is somehow found. In Philadelphia, Republican Governor Tom Corbett magically found $400 million for State Correctional Institutions Phoenix I and II which will be the second most expensive prison complex in the state’s history. But the will to build prisons is not just a Republicans obsession.
Plenty of political energy by various Democrats, and the Obama Administration, is going into continuing to fund federal prisons in Illinois and Chicago. For three years straight, the Obama Administration has requested more money for federal prisons. In this year’s budget request, the Obama Administration asked for a budget increase for the third year in a row. The federal prison budget is now $8.6 billion. Obama has now surpassed Bush in funding prisons and the number of federal prisons incarcerated — 219,000 — half on drug related crimes. The total prison population topped 2 million in 2003 and shows no sign of decreasing even though states are running out of money to jail people.
Source
|
US Relaxes Health Law Income, Insurance Status Rule for Exchanges
Days after delaying health insurance requirements for employers, the Obama administration has decided to roll back requirements for new state online insurance marketplaces to verify the income and health coverage status of people who apply for subsidized coverage. ...
final regulations released quietly on Friday by the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) give 16 states and the District of Columbia, which are setting up their own exchanges, until 2015 to begin random sampling of enrollees' employer-insurance status. The rules also allow only random— rather than comprehensive—checks on income eligibility in 2014. ...
The regulations, contained in a 606-page HHS rule, allowed state-run exchanges to accept an enrollee's "attestation regarding enrollment in an eligible employer-sponsored plan." Marketplaces to be operated by the federal government in 34 states will still make random checks to verify applicant insurance status in 2014, it said.
"For income verification, for the first year of operations, we are providing (state and federal) exchanges with temporarily expanded discretion to accept an attestation of projected annual household income without further verification," the rule said. Link
What a mess...
|
|
|
|