Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

More fun with unemployment numbers: week of October 31

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #31
    Re: More fun with unemployment numbers: week of October 31

    Originally posted by c1ue View Post
    And again you show your ideological idiocy. It is a pity you don't take even 5 seconds to check your statements before you utter them.

    http://www.columbia.edu/cu/news/06/04/gelman.html



    Oops!
    My oh my! Your rudeness is obviously channeling your frustration. Here at the iTulip neighborhood bar, wide ranging discussions along with disagreements, are normal. Hopefully the exchange of ideas, opinions, and data, are helpful in helping everyone in the bar reach profitable investment decisions, and well reasoned conclusions about the matter at hand. Occasionally it seems, some might have a beer or 2 too many and it's time to cut back a little and relax a bit. Maybe FRED can bring you an order of Jumbo Fries and when you've finished, you'll feel much better. ;)

    Comment


    • #32
      Re: More fun with unemployment numbers: week of October 31

      Originally posted by Toast'd One
      My oh my! Your rudeness is obviously channeling your frustration.
      I have no frustration with those who debate, but are unarmed.

      Comment


      • #33
        Re: More fun with unemployment numbers: week of October 31

        Originally posted by Quincy K View Post
        To this point, monetary and fiscal policies have helped both the stock market and unemployment. Money contninues to get injected into the markets by government entities such as GS in which laymen then
        extract the equity through gains that then filters into the economy saving jobs. Wash. Rinse. Recycle. Since deficits don't matter for the US, we can see this kind of subsidy for the indefinate future.

        If the market would have stayed at the March lows, where would the UE rate be right now?

        We are way past the Rubicon. Inflate or die.

        At this point, it is evident that over a long term, a spending based service economy cannot sustain a labor force of 150 million people without drastic falls in wages and standards of living at some point in time.
        Last edited by touchring; November 10, 2009, 11:07 PM.

        Comment

        Working...
        X