patrick.net

This is only one of many documented lies Obama has told regarding the recession and job statistics. He can spin it all he wants, but the fact is that sustainable jobs are not being created due to his efforts. Jobless claims continue as does the length of time people are collecting unemployment benefits. Obama has been in over his head from day one and more and more people are recognizing that fact.

RayAmerica says

Obama has been in over his head from day one and more and more people are recognizing that fact

Fucking Superman himself would have been "over his head" on January 21, 2009.

I realize painting Obama as incompetent is all you got, but it's really retarded.

What does that graph have to do with Obama saying we aren't in a jobless recovery? I realize he was handed a turd of an economy - but do you think we are in a jobless recovery or not? It *SEEMS* like its a jobless recovery to me ... I was surprised that he would say that we weren't based on all of the doom-and-gloom going around for the past year. Perhaps there is something I'm missing here?

EightBall says

What does that graph have to do with Obama saying we aren’t in a jobless recovery?

I was responding to the "in over his head" baseless character assassination.

As for lying about the economy, that's in the President's job description. Carter tried telling the truth and look where that got him.

Gotcha Troy

Just think of what McCain would be saying now though ... "Recession? I paid full price to the Hair Club and it hasn't helped. But isn't the war going lovely?"

EightBall says

What does that graph have to do with Obama saying we aren’t in a jobless recovery? I realize he was handed a turd of an economy - but do you think we are in a jobless recovery or not? It *SEEMS* like its a jobless recovery to me … I was surprised that he would say that we weren’t based on all of the doom-and-gloom going around for the past year. Perhaps there is something I’m missing here?

It's CHART! Booga Wooga Boogalie BOO!
Are you not in awe? You dare to NOT put forth the daily meeting buzzword affirmation? Quick my GOD someone get this man a spread sheet...

Yeah, I'm amazed at the flippant tossing around of unrelated charts on this site every day. No one even dares to question the data behind the squigly lines, to see if they can load it up and product the same results or the validity of the data set they are working with.

Tenouncetrout says

unrelated charts

The lifeblood of any economy is debt, and not understanding this basic fact is akin to a surgeon not understanding blood circulation or a meteorologist not knowing what air pressure is.

Now, I should admit that I don't really know what that chart above really means. For one thing, all constant rate-of-growth (ie. hyperbolic) charts look scary when looked at in isolation. For all I know the hyperbolic times will resume and we'll be looking at $100T of household debt in my lifetime.

But what you should understand from that squiggly line above is that from the 2001 recession to the 2007 recession the Bush Economy was fueled by a doubling of household debt, from $7T to over $14T.

If we had any probity the lending curve should have been flattened in the 1998-2005 period, giving us (say) an $8T debt figure today.

Instead, in the 2000s the economy was blowing through those $2T tickmarks on the graph like Pacman eating dots.

shows how the economy grew accustomed to that nice $1T/yr rate of debt growth during the boom years. That's an average of $10,000 per household per year of debt, an $800 PER MONTH of stimulus. And that's on top of the Bush tax cuts and resulting deficit spending that was doubly-stimulating the economy.

People with taunts of "Where's your recovery now, smart boy?" need to fully understand that the previous decade was built entirely on debt, both the Federal gov't debt held by the public (which rose from $3.3T to well over $7T under Bush) plus the $6T+ in household debt, and another $2T in corporate debt for good measure.

Rand Paul has recently said it was hyper-inflation in Germany which gave them Hitler. This is entirely incorrect, it was the deflationary collapse of the 1930s that prompted the rise of the NSDAP and its election success of 1930.

(In 1928 the NSDAP won 2.6% of the vote, two years later, in the immediate aftershock of the global collapse of 1929, this was 18.3%, and two years further into the global depression the NSDAP won 37.8%. -- the German economic recovery of the 1920s was built largely on American debt issuance and when that was shut off in 1930 the Germans were screwed)

Few people have actually seen this debt curve we were on 1996-2007. To see it is, I hope, to understand the colossal problem we still face now. By that chart immediately above we should have around $17T of household debt today. If we did, we wouldn't be in such bad straits as now, because paying your way with credit drawdowns is EASY.

Most of which most people have already defaulted, and that debt has been sold to arbitrators that either may or may not ever see their money again. That squiggly line may be debt, but it is also interest and speculated returns, the risk is absorbed in those numbers, and skews the actual money laid out by the lenders. That 7 trillion also includes fees, and other charges that they either may or may not ever realize.

Household liabilities can also mean anything, and lets not kid our selves although there are plenty of people out of work and in dire straights. Those working are still plugging along like they hope nothing bad ever happens to them. The stores are still filled with them. People are getting more selective, they don't feel compelled to run down to Box Mart and fill up the Navigator with Family size jumbo monolith size of consumables, and throw in and all made in China for just $9.99 in the cart.

We're in deep crap for one simple reason. Money is cheap from the Government, and large companies have found a new business paradigm where your business grows by asking for Bailouts, and giving false economic outlook perspectives, with full intention of revising those figures latter for even more money, all the while showing these figures as honest growth in our GDP.

There's no incentive to employ when you don't have to "Actually" produce.

These companies can't even produce accurate data, am I to expect to believe that the data in those charts you guys throw around to be valid?

...I don't think so.