unemployement up to 9.8%

[joevol320]

Unemployment Rises to 9.8% as U.S. Adds Just 39,00 Jobs - Bloomberg

but according to pelosi, unemployment benefits help the economy. so, this will only help with the economy.

[TennTradition]

I swear that a few months back, you posted a similar report and you made the same mistake in the title. Unemployment up TO 9.8%, not up 9.8%.
Posted via VolNation Mobile

[utvolpj]

fixed for TT

[TennTradition]

Thanks. My day can now go on.
Posted via VolNation Mobile

[joevol320]

the true unemployement figures are probably around 15-16%. i think 9.8% is with some number rigging.

[Cartervol]

Yeah it's much worse than 9.8 percent. But hey, keep extending and raising unemployment benefits. Strong motivation to find a job, these guys are geniuses.

[joevol320]

Originally Posted by Cartervol

Yeah it's much worse than 9.8 percent. But hey, keep extending and raising unemployment benefits. Strong motivation to find a job, these guys are geniuses.

don't you that according to pelosi, unemployement spurs the economy.

[lawgator1]

This is really bad news.

Query:

1) We have had the Bush tax cuts in place for almost a decade.

2) We had a terrible recession during that time period and now have very high unemployment.

3) What makes people think that continuing the tax breaks will create jobs? So far, the wealthiest are getting wealthier because their corporate interests have cut jobs. The money they are saving is NOT going to create jobs.

Why does anyone think it will be different if the cuts remain in place?

Seems to me that if the wealthy are just hoarding the cash and making even more off of it in investing overseas, we'd be better off taxing the crap out of them and at least recouping some of those dollars to bring down the deficit.

[droski]

there was a significant increase in economic activity after the bush tax cuts were implemented. then the housing market collapsed.

what is your evidence that the money the rich are saving are not going to create jobs? increased investment capital creats jobs. that is fact.

obama spends a trillion to "save jobs" and somehow that money down the tubes doesn't bother you. at least the tax cuts sends money directy to the people rather than paying off the special interests.

[BigPapaVol]

Originally Posted by droski

there was a significant increase in economic activity after the bush tax cuts were implemented. then the housing market collapsed.

what is your evidence that the money the rich are saving are not going to create jobs? increased investment capital creats jobs. that is fact.

obama spends a trillion to "save jobs" and somehow that money down the tubes doesn't bother you. at least the tax cuts sends money directy to the people rather than paying off the special interests.

You're dealing with a fundamental understanding of economics if you're having to explain that savings is an investment engine.
Posted via VolNation Mobile

[lawgator1]

Originally Posted by droski

there was a significant increase in economic activity after the bush tax cuts were implemented. then the housing market collapsed.

what is your evidence that the money the rich are saving are not going to create jobs? increased investment capital creats jobs. that is fact.

obama spends a trillion to "save jobs" and somehow that money down the tubes doesn't bother you. at least the tax cuts sends money directy to the people rather than paying off the special interests.

I wish that there was some objective way to determine whether the money saved to the super wealthy via the Bush tax cuts are at this point being used as investment capital.

[BigPapaVol]

Originally Posted by lawgator1

I wish that there was some objective way to determine whether the money saved to the super wealthy via the Bush tax cuts are at this point being used as investment capital.

It's either in a mattress or it's investment capital, period. Retirees are the ones in money markets and crappy annuities.
Posted via VolNation Mobile

[lawgator1]

Originally Posted by BigPapaVol

You're dealing with a fundamental understanding of economics if you're having to explain that savings is an investment engine.
Posted via VolNation Mobile

Savings where? And wait, droski is saying that the money is being spent as investment capital, but you are saying it is being saved and that is an "investment engine."

The premise of the argument is that the Bush tax cuts result in capital investment into building industry, which makes jobs. I understand droski's claim that right after the cuts there was some growth, but I have yet to see anything that says a dime of the money generated by the Bush tax cuts in the last five years created jobs by being used for industry.

If anything, it got socked away.;

[BigPapaVol]

Originally Posted by lawgator1

Savings where? And wait, droski is saying that the money is being spent as investment capital, but you are saying it is being saved and that is an "investment engine."

The premise of the argument is that the Bush tax cuts result in capital investment into building industry, which makes jobs. I understand droski's claim that right after the cuts there was some growth, but I have yet to see anything that says a dime of the money generated by the Bush tax cuts in the last five years created jobs by being used for industry.

If anything, it got socked away.;

Think through what savings is.
Posted via VolNation Mobile

[lawgator1]

Originally Posted by BigPapaVol

Think through what savings is.
Posted via VolNation Mobile

While I don't have nearly the knowledge you and droski have, I understand your point.

The problem is that it appears largely theoretical. I'm not sure that the world works the way the theories say it does. At least not in this economy.