We gave Wall Street and the Big Auto companies a bail-out and they blew it. They came back and asked for more. The mess keeps getting uglier and we simply haven’t seen the worst of it. The Federal Reserve painted a really bleak picture on Wednesday, hours after President Obama announced his plan to help homeowners, one day after he signed the Stimulus Bill:
Under the new projections, the unemployment rate will rise to between 8.5 and 8.8 percent this year. The old forecasts, issued in mid-November, predicted the jobless rate would rise to between 7.1 and 7.6 percent.
The Fed also believes the economy will contract this year between 0.5 and 1.3 percent. The old forecast said the economy could shrink by 0.2 percent or expand by 1.1 percent.
The bottomline is that the Feds now anticipate that “unemployment would remain ‘substantially’ higher than normal at the end of 2011 ‘even absent further economic shocks.’” What’s worse, a “few Fed officials — none are identified — feared that it could take five or six years for the economy and employment to get back into a sustainable mode of health.”
According to an Associated Press-GfK poll released on Wednesday, “- Fears are mounting about losing a job, not having enough money to pay the bills and evaporating retirement accounts.”
The poll also found that:
- Nearly two-thirds, or 62 percent, think Obama is making about the right amount of effort to cooperate with Republicans in Congress on solving the country’s economic problems. About the same percentage, 64 percent, think Republicans aren’t doing enough to cooperate with the Democratic president. Obama courted Republicans during negotiations on the stimulus bill, but it passed with no Republican votes in the House and just three GOP votes in the Senate.
- People don’t think much of last year’s $700 billion bailout for the financial industry. Nearly half, or 47 percent, say it had no real effect on the economy, and almost a third, or 32 percent, say it actually made things worse.
Clearly the obstructionist Republicans in Congress just don’t get it and now there are some GOP governors who are actually considering turning down stimulus money. What the? These idiots have their conservative ideology and values twisted just a little too tight. Take California for instance… where “Republicans in the California legislature are trying to close down the entire state.” Unbelievable. Stunning.
The economic pain will cut through this country like a laser through steel, before these idiots wake up and start to realize that we’re all going to be bankrupt soon.
These new unemployment projections probably don’t include those who have run out of benefits and are no longer eligible, but still without work. The true number is most likely higher than 8.6. I wouldn’t be surprised if the true figure was around 12-14% unemployment. I’m not surprised at the 5 – 6 years figure. It took Bill Clinton 2 terms to straighten things out and the economy wasn’t as bad then. They say it should take a year to get things going so I am hoping we see a difference at that time. As for California I don’t know what to make of that…
I’m afraid we have just seen the beginning of the downward slide of this economy. The stimulus package just isn’t enough to do much of anything except give some politicians cover. With the party of NO, doing everything it can to make sure the President fails, just so they can win an election and Democrats afraid to do what it will really take to stop the slide, I don’t see much hope at the moment. I was hoping to see bold, new moves by the President, but so far its looking like the safe politics of old.
angels81 Says:
February 19th, 2009 at 7:34 am
I know what you mean.
During the Clinton administration they changed how unemployment is reported, not counting people who have been out of work for a period of time. The true unemployment rate (U6) is actually about 14% right now.
California is, indeed, in an interesting spot. The proposal to raise 70 billion in new taxes/fees, alas, does not put the state back on the path to recovery. It merely keeps spending even, and we’ll be back in the same spot within a year, particularly as tax revenues are falling.
We also are used to this “shutdown.” This is how it goes in states that require more than a majority to approve a budget. This year is particularly bad, because we are getting IOU’s, but that, too, has happened before.
And jobs that are being sent pink notices are, of course, non-essential positions.
Arnold has not been successful in bringing the Democrats around to deeper cuts OR the handful of Republicans who had signed pledges during their election campaigns to not raise taxes. We already have the highest tax rates in the nation.
Today should be interesting.
Just, I’ve always been curious about that. In the 14% figure, how long are they counting people out of work?
The reason I ask is that in my state, anyway, the state extended unemployment benefits time, so people are on the rolls of the unemployment office for 2 years.
There are numerous states with a higher overall tax burden than California. Connecticut, Hawaii, New Jersey, New York, etc. All are around 9-11%.
http://www.taxfoundation.org/taxdata/show/335.html
Unemployment calculations:
http://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.t12.htm
someone was talking about Starbucks being a barometer for a bad economy…maybe it’s just a badly managed company.
Where does this bit of news fit into the big picture?
Whole Foods shares surge 33% on upgrades/earnings
http://tinyurl.com/budb56
justlen:
check your email for a funny Scarlett pic.
GeoT Says:
February 19th, 2009 at 10:47 am
Took me almost 5 minutes to realize there was someone else in that pic.
# justlen Says:
February 19th, 2009 at 10:52 am
Took me almost 5 minutes to realize there was someone else in that pic.
_____
best day of that guy’s life
OT but interesting: (plus Taylor’s somewhere in Oklahoma so who cares?)
Clinton Tells of Why She Took the Job
Mrs. Clinton said she put aside the disappointment of the election to take Mr. Obama’s job offer because, she said, “We have so many of the same views of what we should do in the world.”
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/20/washington/20diplo.html?_r=2&ref=politics
A challenger to Tom Daschle …. Sarah Palin:
Palin Charged Per Diems For Fox News Interview, Phone Call With Elizabeth Dole
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/02/19/palin-charged-per-diems-f_n_168193.html
details:
http://community.adn.com/adn/node/138143
Check out the video of Hillary on the Indonesian teen show ‘Awesome’
http://tinyurl.com/dev2fy
I wish there were more good Dem talkers on the cable shows! There needs to be more emphasis on the fact that the Dems and Repubs have very different economic theories and approaches to economic justice. It should also be pointed out that the Repub view has failed and how it has failed.No NBC stations mention that at all. I don’t know if it is all deference to Andrea Mitchell( since her husband,the genius, was a part of the fall) or just the right slant of “career liberals”when it comes to the economy.
On a positive note…hell has frozen over! Matthews gave Hillary the ‘Hardball’ award last night for “smarts, moxies and realism”
LL
MSNBC is looking for a new progressive show to fill the spot after Rachel Maddows show. So at least for that three hour block in the evening, we will have a voice.
A challenger to Tom Daschle …. Sarah Palin:
Palin Charged Per Diems For Fox News Interview, Phone Call With Elizabeth Dole
As John Stewart has said, she and Todd are a bunch of grifters. First she grifted Wasilla, then the state of Alaska, now she’s setting her sights on the whole enchilada, the United States of America. I assume her tax problems should disqualify her from future public service.
justlen Says:
February 19th, 2009 at 10:11 am
During the Clinton administration they changed how unemployment is reported, not counting people who have been out of work for a period of time. The true unemployment rate (U6) is actually about 14% right now.
It seems everything that is wrong is some how Clinton’s fault.
By THOMAS McCARROLL Monday, Sep. 09, 1991 (Before Clinton)
Before 1994: To be counted as unemployed, you must not only be out of work but must also have actively looked for a job in the preceding four weeks.
After 1994: A controversial change scheduled for 1994, the Labor Department plans to redefine discouraged workers as those who are still willing to work and have at least looked for a job in the preceding 12-month period. According to John Bregger, assistant commissioner of the Office of Current Employment Analysis, the change could reduce the official number of discouraged workers by about half.
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,973773,00.html
John Williams’ calculates the real unemployment rate is at 18%. http://www.shadowstats.com/charts_republish#emp
Over the next 3 years, a $3 trillion dollar economic contraction that they say is coming, it will get ugly.
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,973773,00.html
Thanks for that JimK.
justlen Says:
February 19th, 2009 at 10:11 am
During the Clinton administration they changed how unemployment is reported
JimK Says:
February 19th, 2009 at 2:26 pm
It seems everything that is wrong is some how Clinton’s fault.
_____
just for the record I don’t think juslen (@ justlen Says:
February 19th, 2009 at 10:11 am) was blaming anything on Clinton, just pointing out when the reporting rules were changed.
I hate the way that we calculate unemployment in this country. I think we need to look at the Unemployment Insurance Modernization Act, which I read about in the book Thinking Big. The Unemployment Insurance Modernization Act – encourage states to reform their systems by making it easier for workers seeking part-time work to qualify, providing resources for job training, and raising caps on maximum benefits so long-term unemployed workers get at least the full twenty-six weeks of benefits in addition to other reforms.
I believe unemployment figures should accurately reflect the true state of the economy, including the underemployed and part timers that couldn’t find full time work.
Isn’t it interesting that EXACTLY the same percentages of people think President Obama isn’t doing enough to “reach out” to the repugnantklan as supported the torturer in chief while he defiled the White House?