Afghanistan has become a battleground over an oil pipeline that could have been negotiated. Instead we are involved in a crisis from which 1752 NATO forces have already died and among them 1,061 US soldiers.
Afghanistan has little value other than strategic. Unless we consider the lavish poppy fields that dot the landscape and are a source of funding the war against the US occupation. Strangely these fields have multiplied since the CIA entered the picture, offering an observation that can’t be dismissed. Are these fields under CIA guardianship?
Given the history of the CIA, as has come to light from Vietnam and the golden triangle, and then under Oliver North, and Iran Contra, this question seems one that could have real significance.
Note: the war against the Taliban had been planned long before the world trade center attack. It was and always has been over resources, and poppy seeds are a resource, and a very valuable one. But even more valuable is the pipeline for oil which has now been completed. What few know is that talks with the Taliban over the pipeline were ongoing to the date of the invasion, and even after.
The US ousted the Taliban, but did we have that right? This is a question we must in the long term ask ourselves.
Since the Taliban were ousted the poppy farms have expanded markedly, now exceeding 100,000 acres. But even more strikingly we invaded Afghanistan under a false plethora of evidence as the Taliban had actually offered to turn Bin Laden over to the US .
Instead we invaded Afghanistan ! We must now step back and ask ourselves why? When we can look at the whole picture with our own introspect we will have a full understanding of what we have become
America has become egocentric, it is what we want that matters. And it has become easier to simply take it rather than to negotiate and pay for it. But in the long run it costs us more.
America ’s ego thought that our military power would crush any opposition, but what this ego failed to understand was that we have been fighting a ghost of ourselves. The lessons we knew from our own history, learned gallantly form the American Revolution.
No enemy can long endure when they are fighting on our shores, just as America is learning today. The Taliban are not the enemy to expel, we have become that enemy.
And with this in mind, the Taliban have planned an offensive against the US , it has been code named “al-Fatah”, which is the Arabic word for "victory".
The target, US forces, security contractors and Afghans working for them who are considered "the ears and eyes of the foreigners”
The new Taliban operation is to begin May 10, the day Hamid Karzai , Afghanistan 's president, arrives in Washington for a four day visit. Karzai wants to convince Obama that peace with the Taliban is the only real and long term solution.
Even as we agree, the question: Will Washington ’s ego allow this resolution of a confrontation that all evidence suggests we are losing?
Friday, May 14, 2010
Bank Reform
JP Morgan Chase, Goldman Sachs, Bank of America, Citigroup and Wells Fargo invest over 6 million dollars to defeat major bank reform.
The nation's five largest and (as consumers feel), least credible banks which currently dominate the derivatives market; are in Washington armed with carpet bags full of cash. They have marshaled a contingency of trade groups, paid lobbyists and their own executives to convince senators that excluding banks from the derivatives business would make markets less safe.
Just how, is a curious oddity?
The banks reason, that the derivatives are a way of protecting their investments from failure, as they lay off the question of performance on third parties, like AIG for example, well that may be a bad example! But we get the point.
But the notion of excluding banks from the derivative market isn’t the issue. The issue is regulation and transparency of this 100 trillion dollar market.
The financial legislation proposed by the Obama administration and as passed by the House would require “most derivatives” to trade on public exchanges, in the belief that a transparent marketplace will be safer and cheaper. The scope of the exchange trading requirement has been the focus of the debate for months. Opponents argue that the bill would limit the industry's ability to customize derivatives to match the needs of clients. But in most cases they are their own client, except when they sell an instrument that an investor questions.
But, so far it has been the banks that have made small fortunes from the derivatives market, the most recent reminder AIG counterparty contracts with these same 5 banks receiving a concealed bailout from the Obama administration, and timothy Geithner’s requirement that AIG pay the banks 100 cents on the dollar. (Another story here)
According to the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, Banks reported $22.6 billion in derivatives revenue in 2009. No doubt they used taxpayer bailout money to invest. Goldman Sachs was paid $13bn alone from AIG in 2009
Derivatives are contracts whose value is determined by something else. Trading in derivatives is dominated by these five banks, they were largely used in connection with Mortgage securitization instruments and were a form of insurance against a mortgage default, it is because of this “insurance” that the banks were made whole after a borrower defaulted, and it is because of these same instruments that the banks have NO incentive to work out a loan modification with a defaulting borrower, as they are made whole by these CDS’s (credit default swaps)
The five banks together have assembled more than 130 registered lobbyists, including 40 former Senate staff members and one retired senator, Trent Lott to water down and in most cases, (after their success in defeating the most concerting elements of the reform bill circulating congress), to defeat the latest round, unregistered Derivatives. Included in the list are also former staff members for the Senate majority and minority leaders, the chairmen and ranking members of the banking and finance committees, and more than 15 other senators.
The real issue and the one the banks are prepared to fight no matter how much money they have to throw at our congress, is control of their industry, this is something they will not tolerate, and after all they “are” the real masters of Washington .
The nation's five largest and (as consumers feel), least credible banks which currently dominate the derivatives market; are in Washington armed with carpet bags full of cash. They have marshaled a contingency of trade groups, paid lobbyists and their own executives to convince senators that excluding banks from the derivatives business would make markets less safe.
Just how, is a curious oddity?
The banks reason, that the derivatives are a way of protecting their investments from failure, as they lay off the question of performance on third parties, like AIG for example, well that may be a bad example! But we get the point.
But the notion of excluding banks from the derivative market isn’t the issue. The issue is regulation and transparency of this 100 trillion dollar market.
The financial legislation proposed by the Obama administration and as passed by the House would require “most derivatives” to trade on public exchanges, in the belief that a transparent marketplace will be safer and cheaper. The scope of the exchange trading requirement has been the focus of the debate for months. Opponents argue that the bill would limit the industry's ability to customize derivatives to match the needs of clients. But in most cases they are their own client, except when they sell an instrument that an investor questions.
But, so far it has been the banks that have made small fortunes from the derivatives market, the most recent reminder AIG counterparty contracts with these same 5 banks receiving a concealed bailout from the Obama administration, and timothy Geithner’s requirement that AIG pay the banks 100 cents on the dollar. (Another story here)
According to the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, Banks reported $22.6 billion in derivatives revenue in 2009. No doubt they used taxpayer bailout money to invest. Goldman Sachs was paid $13bn alone from AIG in 2009
Derivatives are contracts whose value is determined by something else. Trading in derivatives is dominated by these five banks, they were largely used in connection with Mortgage securitization instruments and were a form of insurance against a mortgage default, it is because of this “insurance” that the banks were made whole after a borrower defaulted, and it is because of these same instruments that the banks have NO incentive to work out a loan modification with a defaulting borrower, as they are made whole by these CDS’s (credit default swaps)
The five banks together have assembled more than 130 registered lobbyists, including 40 former Senate staff members and one retired senator, Trent Lott to water down and in most cases, (after their success in defeating the most concerting elements of the reform bill circulating congress), to defeat the latest round, unregistered Derivatives. Included in the list are also former staff members for the Senate majority and minority leaders, the chairmen and ranking members of the banking and finance committees, and more than 15 other senators.
The real issue and the one the banks are prepared to fight no matter how much money they have to throw at our congress, is control of their industry, this is something they will not tolerate, and after all they “are” the real masters of Washington .
Sunday, May 9, 2010
US Wars of Choice may cause the dollar’s collapse
US Involvement across the globe in its numerous war settings has placed a heavy financial burden on US taxpayers who are no longer capable of carrying this debt level.
As with all past attempts of governance, war has been the mechanism to both unite the people and provide for an economy, in short it didn’t work for the Roman or Grecian empires and it won’t work for the American empire either.
Using history as a reference, we have experienced no less than 212 different empires attempt to rule, with the US included that number is 213, each failed. And America is failing as this article is written.
What is bringing America to its knees is ego. Ego is an exaggerated sense of self-importance; the self, especially as distinct from the world and other selves.
What we want, we take, and that is not how to make peace in the world. It is how to turn the world against us. And we are already witnessing a growing discontent.
And now because of ego, we are caught up in struggles across the globe, mostly for oil, but also for control and to expand our footprint, and oh yes, and for profit, a military war complex, and machine that grinds our tax dollars into weapons, for war.
One look at the Pentagon’s "base budget" request for fiscal 2011 (which begins October 1) calls for some $549 billion, an increase of $18 billion over the appropriation for the current fiscal year.
But that is only the beginning. The administration is in addition requesting another $160 billion for "Overseas Contingency Operations" (OCO) that’s to pay for wars and occupations in Iraq , Afghanistan , and elsewhere.
But there is more, $25 billion plus in military spending outside the "Department of Defense," much of that for nuclear weapons included in the Department of Energy's budget. (This $25 billion could be much larger, depending on what is included.)
The grand total - comes to at least $734 billion. There is an additional $33 billion "emergency supplemental" appropriation to pay for the Afghanistan escalation; it's said to cost $1 million to maintain one soldier there for a year. That $33 billion would be counted as part of FY 2010 spending, and, of course, there may be a supplemental in 2011 as well. The total has more than doubled in the last decade and continues to rise. It may well top (1) trillion this fiscal year.
What has this budget accomplished?
Wars make people less safe, if that is the purpose of this and the past administration, they have accomplished their goal. But in doing so, they may have created a dichotomy from which our dollar may well collapse.
As with all past attempts of governance, war has been the mechanism to both unite the people and provide for an economy, in short it didn’t work for the Roman or Grecian empires and it won’t work for the American empire either.
Using history as a reference, we have experienced no less than 212 different empires attempt to rule, with the US included that number is 213, each failed. And America is failing as this article is written.
What is bringing America to its knees is ego. Ego is an exaggerated sense of self-importance; the self, especially as distinct from the world and other selves.
What we want, we take, and that is not how to make peace in the world. It is how to turn the world against us. And we are already witnessing a growing discontent.
And now because of ego, we are caught up in struggles across the globe, mostly for oil, but also for control and to expand our footprint, and oh yes, and for profit, a military war complex, and machine that grinds our tax dollars into weapons, for war.
One look at the Pentagon’s "base budget" request for fiscal 2011 (which begins October 1) calls for some $549 billion, an increase of $18 billion over the appropriation for the current fiscal year.
But that is only the beginning. The administration is in addition requesting another $160 billion for "Overseas Contingency Operations" (OCO) that’s to pay for wars and occupations in Iraq , Afghanistan , and elsewhere.
But there is more, $25 billion plus in military spending outside the "Department of Defense," much of that for nuclear weapons included in the Department of Energy's budget. (This $25 billion could be much larger, depending on what is included.)
The grand total - comes to at least $734 billion. There is an additional $33 billion "emergency supplemental" appropriation to pay for the Afghanistan escalation; it's said to cost $1 million to maintain one soldier there for a year. That $33 billion would be counted as part of FY 2010 spending, and, of course, there may be a supplemental in 2011 as well. The total has more than doubled in the last decade and continues to rise. It may well top (1) trillion this fiscal year.
What has this budget accomplished?
Wars make people less safe, if that is the purpose of this and the past administration, they have accomplished their goal. But in doing so, they may have created a dichotomy from which our dollar may well collapse.
Bank control of congress and the White House, pays off big time for Wall Street
The US Senate has more interest in the big pools of money the banks funnel for campaigns through their lobbyists, than for the people who elect them to office.
This was exemplified last night (May 7) when the Senate rejected the single most important element of Wall Street reform, being able to break up the “too big to fail banks” the Senate rejected this provision by a vote of 33 to 61; 27 Democrats joined all but three Republicans to vote against breaking up the banks.
The 61 votes against the measure are votes in favor of Wall Street's continuing stranglehold over our economy. But more importantly it allows business as usual on Wall Street, and without fear of government reprisal. It also guarantees future bail outs when they become necessary. (And they will)
At the same time, the Senate also voted down a $50 billion Wall Street tax that would have been used to fund the cost of shutting down a major failing bank, assuring future taxpayer funding when a “too big to fail” bank again finds itself in trouble.
By rejecting both the break-up bill and the bank tax, Wall Street has emerged as a clear winner and shown what clout and control they have over the US political system and particularly over congress, and the president.
President Obama who strongly opposed both the tax and the break-up measures, hosted J.P. Morgan Chase CEO Jamie Dimon for dinner at the White House on Monday. J.P. Morgan is the largest U.S. bank, and spent more money on lobbying in 2009 than any other bank. House Minority Leader John Boehner (R-OH) has aggressively courted Dimon for campaign cash, as has Obama
It seems that money is more important to congress and the president, that the interests of the nation!
The failure of congress to address the banking problems in the US and to protect the interest of the American people over their benefactors, have assured further reckless behavior from these mega financial institutions.
By allowing the megabanks to remain super-sized, Congress has insulated them from the fallout associated with the Fed disclosures, and given them a tool to fight other reforms. Our giant financial institutions are not only too-big-to-fail they are now too-big-to-regulate!
No matter what else Congress may “ultimately” enact, in the name of Bank reform, Congress has decided that it will not confront the single greatest problem and threat to the U.S. economy: the “Too Big To Fail banks”.
If any meaningful legislation is passed it will be a total surprise.
Perhaps the issue of “too big to fail” will ultimately be address by a different forum, the American People themselves who after all have the last word.
Following is a list of Senators, who voted to protect the banks against the interest of the American people, its time to retire each and ever one of them.
Akaka (D-HI);
Alexander (R-TN);
Barrasso (R-WY)
Baucus (D-MT);
Bayh (D-IN);
Bennet (D-CO);
Bond (R-MO);
Brown (R-MA);
Brownback (R-KS);
Burr (R-NC);
Carper (D-DE);
Chambliss (R-GA);
Cochran (R-MS);
Collins (R-ME);
Conrad (D-ND);
Corker (R-TN)
Cornyn (R-TX);
Crapo (R-ID);
Dodd (D-CT);
Enzi (R-WY);
Feinstein (D-CA);
Gillibrand (D-NY);
Graham (R-SC);
Grassley (R-IA);
Gregg (R-NH);
Hagan (D-NC)
Hatch (R-UT);
Hutchison (R-TX);
Inhofe (R-OK);
Inouye (D-HI);
Isakson (R-GA);
Johanns (R-NE)
Johnson (D-SD);
Kerry (D-MA);
Klobuchar (D-MN)
Kohl (D-WI);
Kyl (R-AZ);
Landrieu (D-LA)
Lautenberg (D-NJ);
LeMieux (R-FL);
Lieberman (ID-CT);
McCain (R-AZ);
McCaskill (D-MO);
McConnell (R-KY);
Menendez (D-NJ);
Murkowski (R-AK)
Nelson (D-FL);
Nelson (D-NE);
Reed (D-RI);
Risch (R-ID);
Roberts (R-KS);
Schumer (D-NY);
Sessions (R-AL);
Shaheen (D-NH);
Snowe (R-ME);
Tester (D-MT);
Thune (R-SD);
Udall (D-CO);
Voinovich (R-OH)
Warner (D-VA);
Wicker (R-MS)
But equally important remember that Obama as well is financially beholden to the mega bank interests.
This was exemplified last night (May 7) when the Senate rejected the single most important element of Wall Street reform, being able to break up the “too big to fail banks” the Senate rejected this provision by a vote of 33 to 61; 27 Democrats joined all but three Republicans to vote against breaking up the banks.
The 61 votes against the measure are votes in favor of Wall Street's continuing stranglehold over our economy. But more importantly it allows business as usual on Wall Street, and without fear of government reprisal. It also guarantees future bail outs when they become necessary. (And they will)
At the same time, the Senate also voted down a $50 billion Wall Street tax that would have been used to fund the cost of shutting down a major failing bank, assuring future taxpayer funding when a “too big to fail” bank again finds itself in trouble.
By rejecting both the break-up bill and the bank tax, Wall Street has emerged as a clear winner and shown what clout and control they have over the US political system and particularly over congress, and the president.
President Obama who strongly opposed both the tax and the break-up measures, hosted J.P. Morgan Chase CEO Jamie Dimon for dinner at the White House on Monday. J.P. Morgan is the largest U.S. bank, and spent more money on lobbying in 2009 than any other bank. House Minority Leader John Boehner (R-OH) has aggressively courted Dimon for campaign cash, as has Obama
It seems that money is more important to congress and the president, that the interests of the nation!
The failure of congress to address the banking problems in the US and to protect the interest of the American people over their benefactors, have assured further reckless behavior from these mega financial institutions.
By allowing the megabanks to remain super-sized, Congress has insulated them from the fallout associated with the Fed disclosures, and given them a tool to fight other reforms. Our giant financial institutions are not only too-big-to-fail they are now too-big-to-regulate!
No matter what else Congress may “ultimately” enact, in the name of Bank reform, Congress has decided that it will not confront the single greatest problem and threat to the U.S. economy: the “Too Big To Fail banks”.
If any meaningful legislation is passed it will be a total surprise.
Perhaps the issue of “too big to fail” will ultimately be address by a different forum, the American People themselves who after all have the last word.
Following is a list of Senators, who voted to protect the banks against the interest of the American people, its time to retire each and ever one of them.
Akaka (D-HI);
Alexander (R-TN);
Barrasso (R-WY)
Baucus (D-MT);
Bayh (D-IN);
Bennet (D-CO);
Bond (R-MO);
Brown (R-MA);
Brownback (R-KS);
Burr (R-NC);
Carper (D-DE);
Chambliss (R-GA);
Cochran (R-MS);
Collins (R-ME);
Conrad (D-ND);
Corker (R-TN)
Cornyn (R-TX);
Crapo (R-ID);
Dodd (D-CT);
Enzi (R-WY);
Feinstein (D-CA);
Gillibrand (D-NY);
Graham (R-SC);
Grassley (R-IA);
Gregg (R-NH);
Hagan (D-NC)
Hatch (R-UT);
Hutchison (R-TX);
Inhofe (R-OK);
Inouye (D-HI);
Isakson (R-GA);
Johanns (R-NE)
Johnson (D-SD);
Kerry (D-MA);
Klobuchar (D-MN)
Kohl (D-WI);
Kyl (R-AZ);
Landrieu (D-LA)
Lautenberg (D-NJ);
LeMieux (R-FL);
Lieberman (ID-CT);
McCain (R-AZ);
McCaskill (D-MO);
McConnell (R-KY);
Menendez (D-NJ);
Murkowski (R-AK)
Nelson (D-FL);
Nelson (D-NE);
Reed (D-RI);
Risch (R-ID);
Roberts (R-KS);
Schumer (D-NY);
Sessions (R-AL);
Shaheen (D-NH);
Snowe (R-ME);
Tester (D-MT);
Thune (R-SD);
Udall (D-CO);
Voinovich (R-OH)
Warner (D-VA);
Wicker (R-MS)
But equally important remember that Obama as well is financially beholden to the mega bank interests.
Rush Limbaugh, and The Third Gulf War?
Generally I take Rush Limbaugh with strong bourbon, or a dose of anything that will kill the pain.
Unfortunately after the tranquilizer wears off, Rush Limbaugh is still there and I find that he is more than a bad illusion, he is real, and that scares me.
I have found that Idiots evolve from imbeciles, (or is it the other way around) and certainly Rush Limbaugh and Glenn Beck are far ahead of the pack here. And their latest rambling, stresses just how far south of the border their mind has wondered.
The latest triad of thought seems demented but it is also strikingly within the realm of possibility. The neoconservative mind set theorizes a war front, and as a part of this chimera they have conceived that the gulf BP Rig was attacked and was the subject of eco-terrorism from some enemy nation. They even theorize that nation!
Does this make sense, certainly to some conspiracy theorists it does, is this alleged attack a possibility, certainly it is within the realm of prospect.
The theory is not exclusive of Limbaugh and is furthered by web and blog sites such as WhatDoesItMean.com which contains an article titled "US Orders Media Blackout Over North Korean Torpedoing of Gulf of Mexico Oil Rig"
Does this give credence to Limbaugh and his followers, apparently it does. As for me, I’ll just have “one” more bourbon and sleep Limbaugh off.
Unfortunately after the tranquilizer wears off, Rush Limbaugh is still there and I find that he is more than a bad illusion, he is real, and that scares me.
I have found that Idiots evolve from imbeciles, (or is it the other way around) and certainly Rush Limbaugh and Glenn Beck are far ahead of the pack here. And their latest rambling, stresses just how far south of the border their mind has wondered.
The latest triad of thought seems demented but it is also strikingly within the realm of possibility. The neoconservative mind set theorizes a war front, and as a part of this chimera they have conceived that the gulf BP Rig was attacked and was the subject of eco-terrorism from some enemy nation. They even theorize that nation!
Does this make sense, certainly to some conspiracy theorists it does, is this alleged attack a possibility, certainly it is within the realm of prospect.
The theory is not exclusive of Limbaugh and is furthered by web and blog sites such as WhatDoesItMean.com which contains an article titled "US Orders Media Blackout Over North Korean Torpedoing of Gulf of Mexico Oil Rig"
Does this give credence to Limbaugh and his followers, apparently it does. As for me, I’ll just have “one” more bourbon and sleep Limbaugh off.
Friday, May 7, 2010
Another major fiasco by the Obama Administration coming soon to a bank near you
The Obama administration now proposes a new bailout for small and medium sized banks. This new bank bailout is in the form of a $30bn support program aimed at helping small business.
First and foremost $30bn will barely cover lunch! And certainly it won’t cover the executive bonus pools.
However setting that aside if this were really a plan to help small business, the appropriate source to provide these funds to would be the SBA, Small Business Administration. Or, The Small Business Investment Companies, (SBIC’s).
By providing the funds to small and medium sized banks, with the idea that they will loan the money to businesses, is like betting against the odds in Las Vegas, “it ain’t gonna happen” and either President Obama is a slow learner, as we just tried this concept with the Wall Street Banks, (and they have been using the money to play the Market) or there is an intent here to bail out these small and medium sized banks and possibly to prevent the remainder of the 700 still primed and ready to fail, from actually failing.
In remarks to reporters at the White House, President Obama said that the program had been expanded to include a new state “small business credit” that would support efforts by state governments to provide loans to small businesses. But where that money will come from is anybody’s guess. The states are still struggling just to stay afloat. So far President Obama has designed one failed program after another, and we are left to pick up the pieces.
In any event with Washington Politics, things are never as they seem.
First and foremost $30bn will barely cover lunch! And certainly it won’t cover the executive bonus pools.
However setting that aside if this were really a plan to help small business, the appropriate source to provide these funds to would be the SBA, Small Business Administration. Or, The Small Business Investment Companies, (SBIC’s).
By providing the funds to small and medium sized banks, with the idea that they will loan the money to businesses, is like betting against the odds in Las Vegas, “it ain’t gonna happen” and either President Obama is a slow learner, as we just tried this concept with the Wall Street Banks, (and they have been using the money to play the Market) or there is an intent here to bail out these small and medium sized banks and possibly to prevent the remainder of the 700 still primed and ready to fail, from actually failing.
In remarks to reporters at the White House, President Obama said that the program had been expanded to include a new state “small business credit” that would support efforts by state governments to provide loans to small businesses. But where that money will come from is anybody’s guess. The states are still struggling just to stay afloat. So far President Obama has designed one failed program after another, and we are left to pick up the pieces.
In any event with Washington Politics, things are never as they seem.
A Rising Unemployment Rate is NOT Good News!
I read with interest an article by US News this morning that made me wonder what some people put in their coffee.
The headline was “Why a Rising Unemployment Rate is Good News”
Well a rising unemployment rate is definitely not good news! Especially for those who recently lost a job, or for those who had given up looking for work.
Let’s take a hard look at the real numbers:
First the true number of unemployed Americans is 11.44% not the 9.9% that other sources are misquoting. Their “misquote” has been based on their acceptance without question the numbers from the Department of Labor, which were misleading, “I am being kind”.
Currently we have 154,715,000 people employed in the US aged16 and over, while 17.7 million are unemployed. 15.3 million Americans unemployed and acknowledged by the labor department and another 2.4 million marginally attached and not counted, but never the less a part of the “real” work force.
The method to determine the unemployment rate is to take the total number of unemployed and divide it by the total number of employed. In short 17.7 million divided by 154,715,000 gives us the 11.44% unemployment rate.
In Simple terms the Unemployment Rate = 'Unemployed Workers' divided by 'Total Labor Force'.
In fact the true numbers of unemployed may even be higher than 11.44% because there are millions of workers that have given up and lost hope.
What these other sources failed to incorporate in their elucidations was that we had 444,000 initial claims filed against a backdrop of an alleged 290,000 hiring’s, this is still a net loss of 154,000 jobs! But don’t forget that 66,000 were temporary workers hired by the US government for the census. If we remove them from the count because they are not full time the picture gets even worse! The net loss goes up to 220,000 net job losses.
A net loss is a net loss no matter how you skin the orange!
America is still shedding jobs!!
The economy is being carried by Americans, some 8 million strong who have given up on any idea of saving their homes, and are spending their money purchasing things they have done without for the past two years, this support is a temporary measure at best.
When we can see 300,000 jobs created each month, over and above job losses, we will see a real recovery. However the Fed itself feels that may be a decade away.
News should be accurate, and give facts. Not a false sense of hope!
The headline was “Why a Rising Unemployment Rate is Good News”
Well a rising unemployment rate is definitely not good news! Especially for those who recently lost a job, or for those who had given up looking for work.
Let’s take a hard look at the real numbers:
First the true number of unemployed Americans is 11.44% not the 9.9% that other sources are misquoting. Their “misquote” has been based on their acceptance without question the numbers from the Department of Labor, which were misleading, “I am being kind”.
Currently we have 154,715,000 people employed in the US aged16 and over, while 17.7 million are unemployed. 15.3 million Americans unemployed and acknowledged by the labor department and another 2.4 million marginally attached and not counted, but never the less a part of the “real” work force.
The method to determine the unemployment rate is to take the total number of unemployed and divide it by the total number of employed. In short 17.7 million divided by 154,715,000 gives us the 11.44% unemployment rate.
In Simple terms the Unemployment Rate = 'Unemployed Workers' divided by 'Total Labor Force'.
In fact the true numbers of unemployed may even be higher than 11.44% because there are millions of workers that have given up and lost hope.
What these other sources failed to incorporate in their elucidations was that we had 444,000 initial claims filed against a backdrop of an alleged 290,000 hiring’s, this is still a net loss of 154,000 jobs! But don’t forget that 66,000 were temporary workers hired by the US government for the census. If we remove them from the count because they are not full time the picture gets even worse! The net loss goes up to 220,000 net job losses.
A net loss is a net loss no matter how you skin the orange!
America is still shedding jobs!!
The economy is being carried by Americans, some 8 million strong who have given up on any idea of saving their homes, and are spending their money purchasing things they have done without for the past two years, this support is a temporary measure at best.
When we can see 300,000 jobs created each month, over and above job losses, we will see a real recovery. However the Fed itself feels that may be a decade away.
News should be accurate, and give facts. Not a false sense of hope!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
