H/T Legal Insurrection
H/T Reaganite Republican
The support has been bought, congress member’s arms twisted, and now Pelosi has declared that a health care vote will occur tomorrow. Congress works on Saturday? No, this will be a “special session.” Let’s not forget that this wouldn’t be the political left if they weren’t foremost concerned with leftist politics. Connolly, a Democrat from VA, titled the Democrats cards indicating why the vote is being pushed. He said of Tuesday’s elections:
"What I saw was a depressed Democratic base. And what that told me is, Democrats are going to have to deliver for that base if they want to excite that base…"
Somebody hand these people a pair of glasses, because clearly they are not seeing the writing on the wall. It was written on the pages of newspapers today with big print reading, “Unemployment hits 10.2%!” Yet where are the special congressional sessions to discuss the economy?
What is more interesting is the complete lack of respect from congressional democrats for their base of supporters. According to Connolly, you are to overlook their failures in dealing with the economy in exchange for a health care bill only a politician would love (here and here), but never use. I pity the sheeple on the left that are not revolting with disgust at this slight.
Since Tuesday’s exit polls showed that all voters are concerned about the economy, let me show you the way to reality (Big Hat Tip to Regeanite Republican for the amazing graph (I still love graphs)). If unemployment data mirrored the White House’s projections for the stimulus, would the left be saying the stimulus is working? Would it not be reasonable to say that the stimulus is causing the problem since we are doing worse than the “do nothing” scenario?
I am well aware that unemployment is a lagging, not leading, economic indicator. This means that the economy needs to improve before unemployment improves. However, this doesn’t mean that nothing about the future of the economy can be extrapolated from unemployment numbers. By all means, the figures we are looking at today regarding unemployment points to a very serious problem with last quarter’s GDP figures.
Over the last few months, economists had been forecasting a slowing in the recession and unemployment. Today’s numbers do not show a slowing in unemployment, but stagnation. If unemployment is stagnate and not tapering off towards positive employment growth as predicted, what does this mean about our recession assumptions? It raises the possibility that the recession is also stagnate and not easing as forecasted.
That’s not all that is stagnating. The Obama administration is dithering on all fronts be it the economy, Iran or Afghanistan. Yet this Saturday, it is absolutely imperative that we pass a health care plan that won’t be implemented until 2013.
Other related posts:
Left Coast Rebel
12 comments
Since Congress is inept, we the people have to face joblessness with our own ingenuity:
November 6, 2009 at 9:07 PMhttp://bit.ly/ozqT6
(satire)
Lets see, a graph that presents:
November 6, 2009 at 9:18 PM1. PROJECTED Unemployment W/O Stimulus
2. PROJECTED Unemployment With Stimulus
3. Current Unemployment
Which shows us, very graphically I might add, why economics is called the 'dismal' science...
It is DISMAL at predicting anything! Economics are always better with hindsight not foresight....
Obama and the Democrats are consistently doing everything wrong with regards to turning around the economy and starting growth. Why not waste time on a health care bill that the majority of the American people don't want passed?
November 6, 2009 at 9:30 PMAnd, the tyranny begins...
BondWooley - Welcome. I'll be sure to check out your videos.
November 6, 2009 at 9:40 PMTao - I like the irreverent economics attitude :) However and this has been my point with the stimulus from the beginning. It was a bad idea. We'll know for sure when it's all over.
Teresa - throw spaghetti against the wall and hope something sticks? You really think the Democrats would do something so reckless???(sarcasm)
Con Gen...
November 7, 2009 at 6:18 AMFrom 'bigger is better' to 'too big to fail' to...TARP!
TARP was the "slippery slope" from which stimulus and then socialism springs....
Marx believed that from the highest form or level of capitalism springs socialism...and he was right.
Our government has been 'stimulating' the economy with military spending and spend and borrow policies since the first Reagan tax cuts...
Thats why I thank Wall Street for socialism...
Did you actually think that you could bail out Wall Street and our financial system and that the citizens would sit around and struggle under unemployment of 20 or 30% (my projections back in 2008) and wait for our economic system to create jobs?
THATS really unrealistic. Just close your eyes and imagine the massive protests that would have incurred had the government NOT done anything inregards to 'stimulating' the economy but had done TARP and then have Wall Street give out the bonuses that it is...
WHEW! It would have been ugly!
@TAO The Stimulus was a load of PORK. It did NOTHING to stimulate the economy. Government does not create jobs. Government is doing all of the wrong things to bring us out of this recession. The government is making this worse. Small businesses could have begun hiring by now if there was a proper stimulus that just didn't dole out money to the government. But now, the unemployment is probably going to get worse beause of the government. This spending is going to cause hyperinflation.
November 7, 2009 at 7:23 AM@ Tao - Take out all the plutocracy talk and I'm with you on TARP. I didn't agree with it then and don't now. Nor do/did many people in this country. However, 20-30% unemployment? Maybe or maybe not. It was do something or something bad might happen. I also expect my government to actually make good decisions with the money they spend. There was always other avenues to take, which brings me to point two.
November 7, 2009 at 8:04 AMThe stimulus on the other hand was just plain stupidity. Bush tried to stimulate consumer demand 6 months earlier and it didn't work.
There were/are still smarter options.
@ Teresa - You've got it.
Teresa,
November 7, 2009 at 8:09 AMI am a small business...
I will only hire employees when I see that DEMAND is sufficient and sustainable to justify increasing production capacity.
Right now consumer spending and business spending is no way near what it has been; people are cutting back on their spending and making wiser choices. People continue to avoid using credit cards...and most likely this is a trend that is long term.
If easy credit is now a thing of the past then the reduced spending is going to be a way of life for the future...
Which means it will be YEARS if not DECADES before current capacity is maximized to the point to warrant increasing that capacity.
This is NOT your typical business cycle recession but rather a fundamental shift in our economic system.
Its like this...
I sell big and tall shirts...three basic body styles in 14 different colors and in 13 sizes. Been selling them for 20 years. There is one BIG catalog retailer for big and tall that I have been trying to do business with for 20 years....and to no avail because they are 'high end' (there do not have a shirt in their catalog for less that $75!!!) and my product just didn't fit their product mix...
I gave up on them years ago...
Yesterday they called and in a 15 minute conversation I am now going to have all my products featured in their Spring 2010 catalog.
People are no longer paying up for luxury items and are much more focussed on quality, value, and price: which is exactly where I positioned my company.
I am glad these folks finally realize that the days of $75 dollar tee shirts are over and they need to lower their expectations...
But this is no 6 month to a year adjustment on the part of this thing called 'demand' or 'the market' I am banking that it is permenant and as such you are going to lose more jobs, more companies, more banks, and on and on....
Don't look at this as some sort of typical business cycle event but rather look at it as a once in a lifetime nightmare....
"I also expect my government to actually make good decisions with the money they spend. There was always other avenues to take, which brings me to point two."
November 7, 2009 at 8:16 AMThat is where you and I are fundamentally different...I don't want government to make one single decision or policy in regards to the economy...all I want them to do is keep things fair, honest, and level....
For too long the government showed favor and or excess benefit to one aspect of our economy and any rational person would realize that in a democracy the majority will eventually have expectations of that government too...
That is what Obama represents....
Had the government stayed out of the economy, the rewarding of 'supply' then there would be no way that anyone else could make any demands on government now.
By the way, whats so shocking about 20% or more unemployment?
November 7, 2009 at 8:35 AMIf you really look at it, and factor in the number of people who drop out of the job market, the number of people who settle for parttime employment, or underemployment, then its very easy to realize that 20 to 30% unemployment is very easy to envision.
When you got 4% unemployment and yet your welfare rolls and the number of folks on disabilty keeps increasing then obviously your unemployment number is not real....
Tao - nothing warms my heart more than excellent business strategy. It's exciting to hear someone who has successfully positioned their business strategy. We should have a conversation about it sometime. Business strategy is a little hobby of mine. I often help out entreprenuers with business plans as a hobby.
November 7, 2009 at 10:10 AMI agree with your economic outlook...at least from a retail side, but that too is only part of the economy as you well know. You are over looking the fact that retail was cashing out on high margins, now that the balloon has popped, companies are going to be looking closely at value innovations. I think that you'll production bounce back a little sooner than you may have thought.
But I think you are right on about changes in consumer behavoir. The longer the recession lasts, the more likely we'll see a prolonged change in psychology.
We really do need to talk about our overall economic/political phylosophies sometime in a more meaningful way. We are hearing two different Obama's. The one I heard said "only government can get us out of the recession." Also, I generally don't consider the lowering of taxes and relaxing of regulations as increased government involvement. Conversely, I generally consider the opposite as increased government involvement.
I personally think the economy is fine; we don’t need much stimulus; and the healthcare overhaul is ill-considered. The politics, however, of doing this plan makes sense to me. This overhaul offers hand-holding for people’s healthcare purchases. When the economy is perceived to be bad, people welcome handholding.
November 7, 2009 at 2:54 PMPost a Comment