Things are looking good for Bush

[Ronnie Raygun]

http://apnews.myway.com/article/20040325/D81HJS680.html

Economy Grows at Solid 4.1 Percent Pace

Mar 25, 3:16 PM (ET)

By JEANNINE AVERSA

WASHINGTON (AP) - America's economic recovery ended 2003 on a good note, growing at a solid 4.1 percent annual rate, and is expected to do even better in the opening quarter of this year.

The latest reading on gross domestic product for the October-to-December quarter was the same as a previous estimate made a month ago, the Commerce Department reported Thursday. That was consistent with economists' forecasts.

GDP measures that value of all goods and services produced within the United States and is considered the most important barometer of the economy's health.

Economic growth in the current January-to-March quarter is expected to clock in at a rate of 4.5 percent, according to some analysts' forecasts. Growth in the April-to-June quarter also should be around that pace, they said.


(AP) Factories saw demand for big-ticket goods rebound in February, good news for the country's economic...
Full Image


Tax refunds and other tax incentives should motivate consumers and businesses to spend and invest more - energizing the economy in the first half of this year, economists said.

"I think we should have another couple of good quarters," said Mark Zandi, chief economist at Economy.com. "The only thing we can be hoping for now is some job growth."

On Wall Street, the GDP report helped to lift stocks. The Dow Jones industrials gained 92 points and the Nasdaq was up 35 points in late morning trading.

It's the second half of the year, though, that some economists are a bit concerned about.

If the lackluster job climate persists, some worry that consumers might turn cautious, thus raising the risk of an economic slowdown in the final two quarters of this year.

The economy added just 21,000 jobs in February - all of them in government - a Labor Department survey of payrolls showed. Job growth has been painfully slow despite better economic activity.

Since President Bush took office in January 2001, the economy has lost 2.2 million jobs.

Presumptive Democratic presidential nominee John Kerry has pointed to this as evidence that Bush's economic policies aren't working. Bush, who has defended his policies, wants Congress to make his tax cuts permanent, contending that this will make the economy stronger and spur job growth.

In other economic news, new claims for unemployment benefits rose last week by a seasonally adjusted 1,000 to 339,000, the Labor Department said.

And, the National Association of Realtors reported that sales of previously owned homes grew by 2 percent in February to a seasonally adjusted annual rate of 6.12 million.

Low interest rates beckoned buyers and pushed home sales to record levels in 2003. Sales are expected to be brisk this year, too.

"With a strong underlying demand for housing from a growing population in a recovering economy, we could be flirting with another record this year," said David Lereah, the association's chief economist.

Although the fourth quarter's GDP growth rate was slower than the red-hot 8.2 percent pace of the third quarter, the economy's performance in the second half of 2003 marked the fastest back-to-back quarterly increases since the first two quarters of 1984.

Until the second half of last year, the economy was struggling mightily to get back on firm footing after being knocked asunder by the 2001 recession, terror attacks and fallout from a wave of corporate accounting scandals.

A noteworthy factor in the pickup in the second half of last year was brisk spending by businesses. Businesses finally cast off some of the caution that had previously restrained capital investment.

It was big cutbacks in capital spending that helped to thrust the economy into recession. Economists said a sustained turnaround in capital spending is a crucial ingredient for the recovery to be lasting.

Businesses boosted spending on equipment and software at a 14.9 percent rate in the fourth quarter. That was a tad slower than the 15.1 percent pace estimated a month ago and came after a 17.6 percent growth rate in the third quarter.

Still, businesses cut spending on new plants and buildings in both the third and fourth quarters. That's been an area that has remained weak.

A measure of after-tax corporate profits, adjusted for changes in inventories and capital depreciation, rose by 7.6 percent in the fourth quarter, following a 10.1 percent increase in the prior quarter. Economists hope that continued good profit growth will be an incentive for businesses to step up hiring.

Consumers, whose spending accounts for roughly two-thirds of all economic activity, also helped the economy. Consumer spending rose at a respectable 3.2 percent pace in the fourth quarter. That was better than the last estimate of a 2.7 percent pace and followed a 6.9 percent growth rate in the third quarter.

[KevinTheOmnivore]

polls seem to disagree with you.

[Ronnie Raygun]

No they don't.

Anyway, I'm talking longterm, not here and now.

[mburbank]

Psychic Naldo strikes again.

Where are the jobs?

Our improving economy is good news for Mexico and India.

[Ronnie Raygun]

The jobs market is improving.

What are you talking about?

[AChimp]

The economy added just 21,000 jobs in February - all of them in government - a Labor Department survey of payrolls showed. Job growth has been painfully slow despite better economic activity.

Ronnie, do you, like, just ignore big sections of articles that you post?

Job market = suck. See? It says so in the article.

[Miss Modular]

The jobs market is improving.

Yeah, if you consider low-paying/temp jobs improvment.

[Zhukov]

Our improving economy is good news for Mexico and India.

No, it's bad nws for them too.

[Anonymous]

I don't read this forum a whole lot, but I thought you were flipping out in here about how much you hated Bush not too long ago, Ron-Bon.

[VinceZeb]

The rise in self-employed people has been undocumented by most labor stats. Does that mean that "there are no jobs" out there?

Honestly, how many "educated" or "skilled" people do you know who are on the streets and can't find a job?

[mburbank]

"The rise in self-employed people has been undocumented by most labor stats."

Huh. So where did you learn about this 'rise' in self employed people? How much are they making? What are there health insurance costs? What were they making before they lost their jobs? I assume you know all this bcause of your access to undocumneted statistics.

"Honestly, how many "educated" or "skilled" people do you know who are on the streets and can't find a job?"
How does several sound to you, mook? And what is it you do for a living and what are your costs?

"I don't have provify those factorial presets for you Jew" Since time and memorial I have perscribe to the Letsay Fair doctoral statue of the free marketplace."
Vinth "Words mean any old thing" Clambake

[VinceZeb]

Max, my job isn't to educate you on where you are wrong. If you want to prove me wrong, go do the research and find out if I am a liar.

[Miss Modular]

Honestly, how many "educated" or "skilled" people do you know who are on the streets and can't find a job?

A lot, actually.

[VinceZeb]

Ok, MM and Max, you have said that you know a lot of skilled people that don't have jobs. What are their skills and what are the demands for their skills in our current enviroment?

[AChimp]

Ahh... see, only now are you bringing "demand" into the equation. :lol

You only argue what's convenient.

[VinceZeb]

Ahh... see, only now are you bringing "demand" into the equation. :lol

You only argue what's convenient.

Yes, idiot, becaue that's the only thing that matters.

You can be so skilled that you can break out a triangle and a flute and play "Aqualung" all by yourself, but if no one wants to pay you for that skill, then it ain't worth shit.

[AChimp]

If it's the most important thing, why do you only bring it up now as an important part of your argument? When I try to read your mind through the computer screen, all I pick up is a craving for donuts.

[mburbank]

Okay, never say I don't give credit where credit is due.

" You can be so skilled that you can break out a triangle and a flute and play "Aqualung" all by yourself, but if no one wants to pay you for that skill, then it ain't worth shit."

THAT was funny, maybe the first intentional thing you've ever said that made me laugh.

"you have said that you know a lot of skilled people that don't have jobs. What are their skills and what are the demands for their skills in our current enviroment?"

It is not the job I am having for the edutumatarorion giving from me on to you. Concertedly if you have a wanting to prove me out wrongly, go look up the factors and bring them out.

Tell you what Claudine. You back up your self employment stats and I'll cut and paste a few hundred pages on the current state of the job market. But chew on this in the meantime. If %100 of the job growth last month was in government, that means the only serious growth in demand that month was for the ever swelling government provided by your big quasi war hero Bush. But then you republicans have always favored huge, bloated government. Oh, wait, no you don't, you're against it.

[VinceZeb]

Max, self-employed people don't show up on payrolls. Thus, they are not counted when employment is calculated. The numbers would not match up. People who are not working at all but have money to support themselves are considered unemployed and count on unemployment rolls. I could not work right now, have 10 million in the back, and when the survey dude calls and I tell him I'm not working, I would be counted as being "unemployed."

Our current employment is at 5.6%. That is a good historical average. The only reason there is a huge whine-fest about it is because the jobs that are being lost are low-level jobs that we can ship over to india. The "high-level" white collar jobs going bye bye are jobs that are not worth the prices that are being paid to American employees. The 90's tech boom/bust was filled with these types of jobs.


http://www.econstats.com/BLS/blsn_m3.htm

There is the unemployment stats since 1948. You can see that without the .com situation, clinton's employment rate would have sucked. An interesting thing to see is the unemployment rates for Clinton's presidency during the '96 campaign...

1996.09 5.000
1996.08 5.100
1996.07 5.600
1996.06 5.500
1996.05 5.400
1996.04 5.400
1996.03 5.800
1996.02 6.000
1996.01 6.300

You should also take a gander at the first four years of Clinton's presidency. "His" unemployment numbers sucked as well and he didn't have a large world-wide war and terrorists scares to worry about either.

[Miss Modular]

I was a Computer Art major in college, and I may be soon hired as a data-entry clerk. For two months. I have friends who are in the same situation, other majors.

[mburbank]

Vinth. Unemployment statistics are not compiled by a 'survey dude' calling people up. They are compiled by people filing for unemployment insurance. That's how all the statistics you posted were compiled.

Here's another group of people who aren't counted in unemployment numbers. People who's unemployment benefits have run out. It's a pretty dumb way to compile statistics, but I guess it's better than using a survey dude.

You understand what this means, right? That the people in the worst trouble as far as jobs go, people who've been unemployed for over a year, are not counted as being unemployed. You knew that, right?

And you also knew that the biggest job losses in the last several years are in manufacturing, and that most of them paid eleven dollars an hour or more? And I'm sure you know that the Bush administration is currently woking to change the deffinition of manufacturing jobs to include fast food workers, because people are making burgers and tacos on an assembly line, so it's kind of like making automobiles, and also coincidentally, it would make manufacturing job losses vanish?

Because if you didn't know all of those things, the numbers you posted would be just... well, numbers. If you don't factor in people who's unemployment has run out and if you don't take a look at people who've replaced jobs with health insurance and good salaries with jobs with no insurance and minimum wage, then those numbers mean... nothing. So I'm sure you knew all that stuff.

[mburbank]

Oh, crap! I just argued the merits with Vinth. I guess that post doesn't exist, because everyone knows all I do is make fun of him for writing like a egotistical third grader.

Hey, Vinth, you write really, really badly! I think you are a dumb dumb. Just pretedn I didn't say any of the other stuff bad writting dumb guy!

[VinceZeb]

You can't, in this economy, be unemployed for a fucking year. If you are, it is because you are either 1) lazy, 2) do not need to work or 3) disabled and unfortuantely cannot work.

EDIT: To answer your dumbass comment about unemployment stats...

...There are numerous ways that employment stats are tracked. There is a survey done phone-to-phone to see in households who are able to work, who are working, and who are unemployed. Unemployment claims are another way another organization gathers unemployment stats.

[mburbank]

" ...There are numerous ways that employment stats are tracked. There is a survey done phone-to-phone to see in households who are able to work, who are working, and who are unemployed."

Huh. Seriously? A phone survey? And those statistics are done by whom? And can be found where? And are used by whom? I know, I know, you don't have to educate me or prove anything.

Say, Vinth, did you know it's been proved that W. ate a baby at a fundraiser? He did! He said "I'll bet all you rich fuckers a million bucks a piece I'll eat baby!" And then he whipped out the baby and by God he ate it! It's on video, but most media isn't covering it. I don't know about you, but I think a guy who'd eat a baby for money shouldn't be president.

Now, don't ask me to tell you where you can see this tape, or read about the baby eating incident. I don't have to prove anything to you. What am I, Lexis Nexis?

Oh, the capper? half way into his after dinner remarks, W. dropped his pnts and took a dump right on stage. And the next day, Chenney is all over the news going "The President never took the dump. He stted the dump was imminent."

[VinceZeb]

Max Burbank: "I can't prove you are wrong, so I will say something stupid to make you look stupid by proxy."

Try again, dumbass.


http://stats.bls.gov/cps/cps_add.htm

Each month, 1,500 highly trained and experienced Census Bureau employees interview persons in the 60,000 sample households for information on the labor force activities (jobholding and jobseeking) or non-labor force status of the members of these households during the week that includes the 12th of the month (the reference week). This information, relating to all household members 16 years of age and over, is entered by the interviewers into laptop computers; at the end of each day's interviewing, the data collected are transmitted to the Census Bureau's central computer in Washington, D.C. In addition, a portion of the sample is interviewed by phone through two central data collection facilities. (Prior to 1994, the interviews were conducted using a paper questionnaire which had to be mailed in by the interviewers each month.)

One of my friends was a sample family. He did interviews over the phone.

[davinxtk]

Vince, you have the most unlikely array of friends, relatives, and roommates of any human being I've ever encountered.


Nobody ever called me while I was unemployed for nearly the entirety of 2003. Nor was I filed amongst the statistics of those who were allowed benefits.
I'd bet your friend took up all of their time.


I know, I know, you don't have to educate me or prove anything.

Now don't let this thread get too much like that other thread, Max, or we might confuse poor Zebba.

[mburbank]

Before commenting on the article, I just want to say, you hve to stop saying 'by proxy' until you find out what it means. It's another phrase you're using totally wrong and it makes you look like an idiot.

Now, let me do something you are incapable of.

I was wrong. There is a phone survey.

It's used as part of the census. If you were to take the figures they got, extrapolate them to the entire population, and then compare them to the unemployment statistics used by the fed to determine the unemployment rate, I think you might make some interesting nd useful dicoveries. I'll do that whn I gt a chance, becuase my gut feeling is they'll support my argument and not yours. So thanks for the link.

[KevinTheOmnivore]

Ok, MM and Max, you have said that you know a lot of skilled people that don't have jobs. What are their skills and what are the demands for their skills in our current enviroment?

Why should they answer? Is it their job to do your research for you and educate you? They through out a claim, didn't necessarily support it, and there's no need to continue, right? Why should anybody ever substantiate any of the things they say, Vince? It seems to be quite a successful technique.

Anyway, as far as the Department of Labor goes, they do in fact have a fucked up method for collecting data. I haven't heard anything about the "self-employment" boom that Vinth had mentioned, but they do stop tracking people once they go unemployed for over a certain period (I believe six months). This means they don't count, and don't get added into the unemployed. Also, many people have decided to take different routes and return to school. I know from talking to a handful of graduate programs that the average age of the graduate/Phd applicant has increased into the mid to late twenties. To my recollection, these people don't get counted as unemployed, either. All of these flawed methods will be good for President "jobless recovery" Bush.

[Miss Modular]

You can't, in this economy, be unemployed for a fucking year. If you are, it is because you are either 1) lazy, 2) do not need to work or 3) disabled and unfortuantely cannot work.


I'm applying for jobs EVERY FUCKING DAY. I send out resumes to five employers or more. It's an extremely competitive market out there right now. Because I'm fresh out of college, therefore don't have as much experience, I tend to be slighted more. It's not a moral failing on my part. Try applying for jobs and you'll know exactly what I'm talking about.

[davinxtk]

Psst, Vincent...

You're not supposed to hand the enemy your gun, tell him how to load and fire it, and then turn your back.
It's bad form.

[VinceZeb]

What are "interesting nd useful dicoveries", Max?

I'm glad to see you admit you are wrong. You should do it more often.... well, I take that back. If you were to admit every time you were wrong, you would wear those keys out on your keyboard.

[davinxtk]

http://24.60.240.39/witfloor.jpg

[mburbank]

"What are "interesting nd useful dicoveries", Max? "

Ugh! ya got me, pard!

No, wait, maybe I'll spend a few posts arguing that 'nd' is a word and that I used it correctly, and then when it's obvious I was wrong insist that 100 out of 100 people would have no problem with my use of 'nd'.

But 'nd' is just a lowly typo, and my mistake. It's the right word spelled wrong, but I know what word it is and I used it correctly. I did totally spell it wrong though. Touche.

See? Admitting I'm wrong is just one of the things I do that makes me more of a man than you, Vinthy.

[davinxtk]

Don't forget dicoveries, Mr. Burbank.

[glowbelly]

i'm one of the lost statistics.

i was laid off in april, went on unemployment and decided to go back to school instead of going back to work. i could have filed for an extension on my bennies, but i decided against it.

i'm 28. there are 4 people in my one photography class that are doing the same thing.

i COULD go back to work right now, but i'm choosing not to. this doesn't mean that i should not be included as an unemployed person. i am.

during the 6 months that i was on unemployment, i applied for jobs. i had to. i'm gonna go ahead and say that i'm pretty well qualified for the work that i have experience in...guess what? not a one called me back for an interview, let alone hired me.

so there ya go.

if you want we can discuss my boyfriend's situation...which is worse than mine, because he works his ass off at a job that pays absolute crap. he's applied all over the place for something better and is getting no response. this is not because he isn't qualified or skilled. it is because there are a very small amount of jobs available in his skill set, and the competition is insane. plus he has standards and refuses to work at what he does and knows best for pennies.

[Brandon]

You can't, in this economy, be unemployed for a fucking year. If you are, it is because you are either 1) lazy, 2) do not need to work or 3) disabled and unfortuantely cannot work.
NOTHING BLACK AND WHITE ABOUT THAT ANALYSIS.

My uncle, a well-educated man with a long career as an engineer, was unemployed for at least a year after the transportation company he worked for got in financial trouble. He searched the entire time for a job and just recently found one.

It's a republican/libertarian fantasy that people would prefer to live off of meager welfare or unemployment rather than holding a well-paying job. Welfare isn't enough to cover basic expenses, and most people find it degrading.

[VinceZeb]

Fucking please.

You expect me to sit here and listen to this crap? There are jobs out there. They all aren't 100 grand a year and include nice cars. If you have to work two jobs to support yourself, then WORK TWO FUCKING JOBS.

It's not the employers duty to make sure you are "well-off" in life. People have jobs out there. You can choose to take them or not. If you think that your skills are to great for the jobs out there, then maybe you chose the wrong skill sets.

[Miss Modular]

You expect me to sit here and listen to this crap? There are jobs out there. They all aren't 100 grand a year and include nice cars. If you have to work two jobs to support yourself, then WORK TWO FUCKING JOBS.

God, you are naive. I don't expect anyone to take care of me. All I want is to be able to move out of my house and into my own apartment. I'm not looking for a $100K job and a nice car. All I want to do is survive. Get over yourself, asshole.

[glowbelly]

oh trust me, bri would be more than happy to get another job, but you know what? i won't let him.

you know why?

because i care about his well being. there's no reason for him to work 60+ hours a week. we get by ok. i'm just saying that he busts his ass right now for a very small paycheck and can't seem to find anything better.

it's not like he's sitting in an office for 8 hours a day. the guy is outside, working HARD. he comes home exhausted and sometimes drives over 200 miles a day. i don't want him working an extra 20 hours on his days off. it would kill his will to live.

it would kill anyones, but you know what? if we needed it, he would. you think that everyone who is complaining about the job market is a lazy ass who is incapable of working hard for their money. you couldn't be more wrong. brian could have taken the unemployment route but he didn't. he CHOSE to work.

so nyah.

[Anonymous]

Not even to mention that it's hard as asscats to even qualify for unemployment in the first place. I couldn't get it and have been unemployed for over a year now. Recently, my father's agreed to put me through an audio engineering course. At the moment my only available job option is part-time at Starbucks. Which I might take if the other thing my friend found doesn't work out.

Also, a phone survey wouldn't include people who don't have phones, or even a house. Or people who are living with other people. Or people who don't take phone surveys. Or people who have devices that block mass-phoning systems. All of whom are far more likely to be unemployed than your 'average' person.

[Protoclown]

Hi Vince. Are you still fat?

[punkgrrrlie10]

I can't even get the part time gig at starbucks b/c now I'm "overqualified"

[AChimp]

I would love to hear about Vinth's job that must be related to his degree in Electronic and Software Engineering.

[mburbank]

Yeah, there Vinthy poo pie. Do you expect me to fucking listen to you when we don't know what you do, who your work for or how you got the job? Concidering how many folks out there have the same 'skill set' as you, I kind of have to wonder what you're doing and who you knew or blew to get the job.

"Oh! OH! I don't have to prove anything to you! Why should I tell you anything when you won't have had a belief of it even if I had had done it! Why don't you ask me to post up a copy of my job employment certifcate of working for a job! Oh, right I forgot, you are too cowardly becuase you know when I say a thing I can always have backed up to it but I'm not going to! It's a great job and I got it becuae I am the best there is at what I do just like Wolverine and I work my ass off just like that guy who doesn't have a ass! I sent our six recipes and I got back thirty fucking replies becuase if you don't have the skills for jobs which haven't had a opening on you then get some other skills like mine which I can prove out any time but won't like my Jenny Craig lecture series!"
Vinth "Getting paid for a medication study for pathological liars" Clambake.

[Anonymous]

I can't even get the part time gig at starbucks b/c now I'm "overqualified"

yeah exactly. Places like that just don't hire people who have a professional job history. They know you are only doing it out of total desperation. They think you won't be subordinate enough and they know you will walk out on the job the second you find something.
We basically have no income right now, but we don't qualify for unemployment. We have no health insurance either and haven't had any in a damn long time. Hopefully something will come through soon, but things are bad right now. There's jack shit out there for jobs