President Obama!
- Thread starter passerby
- Start date
tieguy
Banned
Re: Obamanation here today
LOL, sounds like a great rap song.
I won't be accused of racism for saying rap will I?
LOL, sounds like a great rap song.
I won't be accused of racism for saying rap will I?
Babagounj
Strength through joy
Re: Obamanation here today
[FONT=Verdana,Sans-serif]20 million-plus collect unemployment checks in '09[/FONT][FONT=Verdana,Sans-serif]
Dec 31, 3:10 PM (ET)
By CHRISTOPHER S. RUGABER[/FONT][FONT=Verdana,Sans-serif] [FONT=Verdana,Sans-Serif,Arial]
[/FONT]
WASHINGTON (AP) - A record 20 million-plus people collected unemployment benefits at some point in 2009, a year that ended with the jobless rate at 10 percent.
As the pace of layoffs slows, the number of new applicants visiting unemployment offices has been on the decline in recent months. But limited hiring means the ranks of the long-term unemployed continues to grow, with more than 5.8 million people out of work for more than six months.
The number of new claims for jobless benefits dropped last week to 432,000, the Labor Department said Thursday, down sharply from its late March peak of 674,000. The decline signals that the economy could begin adding a small number of jobs in January, several economists said.
Still, hiring is unlikely to be strong enough to quickly bring down the unemployment rate, which fell from 10.2 percent in October to 10 percent in November. December's rate will be announced Jan. 8.
Companies will remain cautious about adding staff until they are confident the economic recovery is sustainable - something they remain unsure about as consumers and businesses keep a lid on spending, and as the government begins to wind down various stimulus programs.
The Federal Reserve and private economists expect joblessness to stay above 9 percent through the end of 2010.
The slow pace of hiring will force Congress and the Obama administration in 2010 to spend as much as $70 billion to extend jobless aid for the long-term unemployed, or else let benefits - which were extended several times in 2009 - expire for millions of people.
"Fewer people are getting fired, but nobody is finding a job," said Dan Greenhaus, chief economic strategist at Miller Tabak.
Thursday's report illustrates the two different trends: first-time jobless claims are falling as layoffs ease, but the total number of people collecting unemployment checks is still rising.
More than 10.1 million people collected jobless benefits in the week of Dec. 12, the latest data available. That's up by about 200,000 compared with the previous week.
That figure includes 5.3 million people receiving the 26 weeks of aid customarily provided by the states, and 4.8 million people that have shifted to the extended benefit programs enacted by Congress over the past two years and paid for by the federal government. Unemployment insurance averages about $300 per week.
But the extensions are set to expire in February. That could mean as many as 1 million people would run out of unemployment aid in March, according to the National Employment Law Project, a nonprofit group.
The total number of people who at one point collected benefits in 2009 - roughly 20.7 million - is also a record. A larger proportion of the unemployed received jobless benefits in the last steep recession in 1981-82, but the work force has grown by about one-third since then.
Fifteen million Americans are out of work, an increase of 3.8 million since the start of 2009. There are six unemployed people, on average, for each available job. And the so-called underemployment rate, counting part-time workers who want full-time jobs and laid-off workers who have given up their job hunt, stands at 17.2 percent.
Budget-strapped state governments will struggle with higher spending on unemployment insurance in 2010. States are required to set aside money in a trust fund to pay jobless benefits, but 25 have already run through their funds and have borrowed $26 billion from the federal government.
The Labor Department has projected that 40 states may need to borrow as much as $90 billion by 2012.
Thirty-five states have already increased the unemployment insurance taxes they levy on employers for 2010, according to the National Association of State Workforce Agencies. Some are also cutting benefits as they try to reduce the size of budget shortfalls that are expected to reach $180 billion in the coming fiscal year.
The drain on federal and state finances could force Congress to consider raising the federal unemployment insurance tax, which is currently 0.8 percent on the first $7,000 of wages, or making other changes.
This is the new world order ?
[/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana,Sans-serif]20 million-plus collect unemployment checks in '09[/FONT][FONT=Verdana,Sans-serif]
Dec 31, 3:10 PM (ET)
By CHRISTOPHER S. RUGABER[/FONT][FONT=Verdana,Sans-serif] [FONT=Verdana,Sans-Serif,Arial]
[/FONT]
WASHINGTON (AP) - A record 20 million-plus people collected unemployment benefits at some point in 2009, a year that ended with the jobless rate at 10 percent.
As the pace of layoffs slows, the number of new applicants visiting unemployment offices has been on the decline in recent months. But limited hiring means the ranks of the long-term unemployed continues to grow, with more than 5.8 million people out of work for more than six months.
The number of new claims for jobless benefits dropped last week to 432,000, the Labor Department said Thursday, down sharply from its late March peak of 674,000. The decline signals that the economy could begin adding a small number of jobs in January, several economists said.
Still, hiring is unlikely to be strong enough to quickly bring down the unemployment rate, which fell from 10.2 percent in October to 10 percent in November. December's rate will be announced Jan. 8.
Companies will remain cautious about adding staff until they are confident the economic recovery is sustainable - something they remain unsure about as consumers and businesses keep a lid on spending, and as the government begins to wind down various stimulus programs.
The Federal Reserve and private economists expect joblessness to stay above 9 percent through the end of 2010.
The slow pace of hiring will force Congress and the Obama administration in 2010 to spend as much as $70 billion to extend jobless aid for the long-term unemployed, or else let benefits - which were extended several times in 2009 - expire for millions of people.
"Fewer people are getting fired, but nobody is finding a job," said Dan Greenhaus, chief economic strategist at Miller Tabak.
Thursday's report illustrates the two different trends: first-time jobless claims are falling as layoffs ease, but the total number of people collecting unemployment checks is still rising.
More than 10.1 million people collected jobless benefits in the week of Dec. 12, the latest data available. That's up by about 200,000 compared with the previous week.
That figure includes 5.3 million people receiving the 26 weeks of aid customarily provided by the states, and 4.8 million people that have shifted to the extended benefit programs enacted by Congress over the past two years and paid for by the federal government. Unemployment insurance averages about $300 per week.
But the extensions are set to expire in February. That could mean as many as 1 million people would run out of unemployment aid in March, according to the National Employment Law Project, a nonprofit group.
The total number of people who at one point collected benefits in 2009 - roughly 20.7 million - is also a record. A larger proportion of the unemployed received jobless benefits in the last steep recession in 1981-82, but the work force has grown by about one-third since then.
Fifteen million Americans are out of work, an increase of 3.8 million since the start of 2009. There are six unemployed people, on average, for each available job. And the so-called underemployment rate, counting part-time workers who want full-time jobs and laid-off workers who have given up their job hunt, stands at 17.2 percent.
Budget-strapped state governments will struggle with higher spending on unemployment insurance in 2010. States are required to set aside money in a trust fund to pay jobless benefits, but 25 have already run through their funds and have borrowed $26 billion from the federal government.
The Labor Department has projected that 40 states may need to borrow as much as $90 billion by 2012.
Thirty-five states have already increased the unemployment insurance taxes they levy on employers for 2010, according to the National Association of State Workforce Agencies. Some are also cutting benefits as they try to reduce the size of budget shortfalls that are expected to reach $180 billion in the coming fiscal year.
The drain on federal and state finances could force Congress to consider raising the federal unemployment insurance tax, which is currently 0.8 percent on the first $7,000 of wages, or making other changes.
This is the new world order ?
[/FONT]
1989
Well-Known Member
Re: Obamanation here today
"We're getting close to break even," says David Jones of DMJ Advisors, who sees weekly claims at the 400,000 level as a reliable dividing line between growth and contraction. "It may be a little bit early."
Based on that model and with claims falling an average of 75,000 a month since their winter peak of more than 600,000 that adds up to February at the earliest.
Economists also caution that ups and downs in the retail workforce because of the holidays make December and January data a bit cloudy.
"There's a lot of seasonality here," Robert Barbera, chief economist at ITG, told CNBC.
For that reason, economists like to average the months of December and January and February and March, in essence double checking the typically reliable four-week average. That won't be possible, however, until early April, when some say the economy could be churning out 250,000 a jobs a month.
Timing aside, the job market may finally be clear of headwinds for the first time since 2007. Employers have cut payrolls and inventories to the bone, which will mean an inevitable adjustment.
"Firms are stretching the productivity of the workforce beyond its limits," says Pandl.
Nevertheless, concerns about a largely jobless recovery have not been erased in all quarters.
Ken Goldstein of the Conference Board says the earliest payrolls will turn positive is March and increases from thereon will be modest at best, in the 50,000-75,000-a-month range.
"We haven't just gone through a business cycle, we've also gone through a major restructuring of the American economy," says Goldstein. "In the the new cycle, there's a limit to how much companies can sell and make and therefore how many employees they can bring on."
"We're getting close to break even," says David Jones of DMJ Advisors, who sees weekly claims at the 400,000 level as a reliable dividing line between growth and contraction. "It may be a little bit early."
Based on that model and with claims falling an average of 75,000 a month since their winter peak of more than 600,000 that adds up to February at the earliest.
Economists also caution that ups and downs in the retail workforce because of the holidays make December and January data a bit cloudy.
"There's a lot of seasonality here," Robert Barbera, chief economist at ITG, told CNBC.
For that reason, economists like to average the months of December and January and February and March, in essence double checking the typically reliable four-week average. That won't be possible, however, until early April, when some say the economy could be churning out 250,000 a jobs a month.
Timing aside, the job market may finally be clear of headwinds for the first time since 2007. Employers have cut payrolls and inventories to the bone, which will mean an inevitable adjustment.
"Firms are stretching the productivity of the workforce beyond its limits," says Pandl.
Nevertheless, concerns about a largely jobless recovery have not been erased in all quarters.
Ken Goldstein of the Conference Board says the earliest payrolls will turn positive is March and increases from thereon will be modest at best, in the 50,000-75,000-a-month range.
"We haven't just gone through a business cycle, we've also gone through a major restructuring of the American economy," says Goldstein. "In the the new cycle, there's a limit to how much companies can sell and make and therefore how many employees they can bring on."
moreluck
golden ticket member
Re: Obamanation here today
If George W. Bush had been the first President to need a teleprompter installed to be able to get through a press conference, would you have laughed and said this is more proof of how inept he is on his own and is really controlled by smarter men behind the scenes?
If George W. Bush had spent hundreds of thousands of dollars to take Laura Bush to a play in NYC, would you have approved?
If George W. Bush had reduced your retirement plan's holdings of GM stock by 90% and given the unions a majority stake in GM, would you have approved?
If George W. Bush had made a joke at the expense of the Special Olympics, would you have approved?
If George W. Bush had given Gordon Brown a set of inexpensive and incorrectly formatted DVDs, when Gordon Brown had given him a thoughtful and historically significant gift, would you have approved?
If George W. Bush had given the Queen of England an iPod containing videos of his speeches, would you have thought this embarrassingly narcissistic and tacky?
If George W. Bush had bowed to the King of Saudi Arabia, would you have approved?
If George W. Bush had visited Austria and made reference to the non-existent "Austrian language," would you have brushed it off as a minor slip?
If George W. Bush had filled his Cabinet and circle of advisers with people who cannot seem to keep current in their income taxes, would you have approved?
If George W. Bush had been so Hispanic-illiterate as to refer to "Cinco de Cuatro" in front of the Mexican ambassador when it was the 5th of May (Cinco de Mayo), and continued to flub it when he tried again, would you have winced in embarrassment?
If George W. Bush had misspelled the word "advice" would you have hammered him for it, for years like Dan Quayle and his potatoe as proof of what a dunce he is?
If George W. Bush had burned 9,000 gallons of jet fuel to go plant a single tree on Earth Day, would you have concluded he's a hypocrite?
If George W. Bush's administration had okayed Air Force One flying low over millions of people followed by a jet fighter in downtown Manhattan causing widespread panic, would you have wondered whether they actually get what happened on 9-11?
If George W. Bush had failed to send relief aid to flood victims throughout the Midwest with more people killed or made homeless than in New Orleans, would you want it made into a major ongoing political issue with claims of racism and incompetence?
If George W. Bush had created the position of 32 Czars who report directly to him, bypassing the House and Senate on much of what is happening in America, would you have approved?
If George W. Bush had ordered the firing of the CEO of a major corporation, even though he had no constitutional authority to do so, would you have approved?
If George W Bush had proposed to double the national debt, which had taken more than two centuries to accumulate, in one year, would you have approved?
If George W. Bush had then proposed to double the debt again within 10 years, would you have approved?
So, tell me again, what is it about Obama that makes him so brilliant and impressive? Can't think of anything? Don't worry. He's done all this in 10 months -- so you'll have three years and two months to come up with an answer.
.
If George W. Bush had been the first President to need a teleprompter installed to be able to get through a press conference, would you have laughed and said this is more proof of how inept he is on his own and is really controlled by smarter men behind the scenes?
If George W. Bush had spent hundreds of thousands of dollars to take Laura Bush to a play in NYC, would you have approved?
If George W. Bush had reduced your retirement plan's holdings of GM stock by 90% and given the unions a majority stake in GM, would you have approved?
If George W. Bush had made a joke at the expense of the Special Olympics, would you have approved?
If George W. Bush had given Gordon Brown a set of inexpensive and incorrectly formatted DVDs, when Gordon Brown had given him a thoughtful and historically significant gift, would you have approved?
If George W. Bush had given the Queen of England an iPod containing videos of his speeches, would you have thought this embarrassingly narcissistic and tacky?
If George W. Bush had bowed to the King of Saudi Arabia, would you have approved?
If George W. Bush had visited Austria and made reference to the non-existent "Austrian language," would you have brushed it off as a minor slip?
If George W. Bush had filled his Cabinet and circle of advisers with people who cannot seem to keep current in their income taxes, would you have approved?
If George W. Bush had been so Hispanic-illiterate as to refer to "Cinco de Cuatro" in front of the Mexican ambassador when it was the 5th of May (Cinco de Mayo), and continued to flub it when he tried again, would you have winced in embarrassment?
If George W. Bush had misspelled the word "advice" would you have hammered him for it, for years like Dan Quayle and his potatoe as proof of what a dunce he is?
If George W. Bush had burned 9,000 gallons of jet fuel to go plant a single tree on Earth Day, would you have concluded he's a hypocrite?
If George W. Bush's administration had okayed Air Force One flying low over millions of people followed by a jet fighter in downtown Manhattan causing widespread panic, would you have wondered whether they actually get what happened on 9-11?
If George W. Bush had failed to send relief aid to flood victims throughout the Midwest with more people killed or made homeless than in New Orleans, would you want it made into a major ongoing political issue with claims of racism and incompetence?
If George W. Bush had created the position of 32 Czars who report directly to him, bypassing the House and Senate on much of what is happening in America, would you have approved?
If George W. Bush had ordered the firing of the CEO of a major corporation, even though he had no constitutional authority to do so, would you have approved?
If George W Bush had proposed to double the national debt, which had taken more than two centuries to accumulate, in one year, would you have approved?
If George W. Bush had then proposed to double the debt again within 10 years, would you have approved?
So, tell me again, what is it about Obama that makes him so brilliant and impressive? Can't think of anything? Don't worry. He's done all this in 10 months -- so you'll have three years and two months to come up with an answer.
.
island1fox
Well-Known Member
Re: Obamanation here today
Just a little "Pile On " --for laughs !!
1. A Canadian doctor says "Medicine is so advanced in my country that we can take a kidney out of one man,put it in another, and have him looking for work in six weeks.
2. A French Doctor replied, "That is nothing ! We can take a lung out of a person ,put in in another and have him looking for work in four weeks.
3. A German Doctor says, "In my country Medicine is so advanced that we take the heart out of one person, put in in another and have them both looking for work in two weeks.
4. An Illinois Doctor , not to be outdone says "We recently took a man with no brains out of Illinois, put him in the White House for ten months and now one half the world is looking for work.
Just a little "Pile On " --for laughs !!1. A Canadian doctor says "Medicine is so advanced in my country that we can take a kidney out of one man,put it in another, and have him looking for work in six weeks.
2. A French Doctor replied, "That is nothing ! We can take a lung out of a person ,put in in another and have him looking for work in four weeks.
3. A German Doctor says, "In my country Medicine is so advanced that we take the heart out of one person, put in in another and have them both looking for work in two weeks.
4. An Illinois Doctor , not to be outdone says "We recently took a man with no brains out of Illinois, put him in the White House for ten months and now one half the world is looking for work.
Last edited:
wkmac
Well-Known Member
Re: Obamanation here today
Even Nancy Pelosi (the woman you love to hate) is now starting to become a bit critical of the President.
I heard this morning on C-Span about Dobb and was very surprised and equally so with Dorgan. I'm sure republicans will use these events to their advantage but I'm not so sure fear of a republican landslide is the case. Another thing to strongly consider is to ask if there is something out there in the works we don't know of but will hit and the smart money is bailing now. To many leadership level democrats bailing when even the RNC chair admits a republicans takeover is unlikely. So what else is up?
Even Nancy Pelosi (the woman you love to hate) is now starting to become a bit critical of the President.
I heard this morning on C-Span about Dobb and was very surprised and equally so with Dorgan. I'm sure republicans will use these events to their advantage but I'm not so sure fear of a republican landslide is the case. Another thing to strongly consider is to ask if there is something out there in the works we don't know of but will hit and the smart money is bailing now. To many leadership level democrats bailing when even the RNC chair admits a republicans takeover is unlikely. So what else is up?
Lue C Fur
Evil member
Re: Obamanation here today
fewest job loses in two years don't lie. Every economist agrees that the economy is improving. The only thing I can see that will stop it is speculators driving oil prices up to 150 dollars a barrel like they did with the oil man in office. I bet Obama stops that before it gets there.... Hopefully
klein
Für Meno :)
Re: Obamanation here today
Higher oil prices are now due to the fact of a much weaker dollar.
The dollar falls , oil and other commodities go up.
But, other then that, Unionman, I agree with you.
These people watch too much "fear anti-obama fox news" !
Yet, they still earn thier $30 an hr, and if anything changed for them, it was all for the good (lower interesst rates, less mortgage payments therefor), cheaper money to borrow, if they need to.
Yet, the sky is falling.... hmmmm.
Higher oil prices are now due to the fact of a much weaker dollar.
The dollar falls , oil and other commodities go up.
But, other then that, Unionman, I agree with you.
These people watch too much "fear anti-obama fox news" !
Yet, they still earn thier $30 an hr, and if anything changed for them, it was all for the good (lower interesst rates, less mortgage payments therefor), cheaper money to borrow, if they need to.
Yet, the sky is falling.... hmmmm.
klein
Für Meno :)
Re: Obamanation here today
Here is the chart :
Works with the Euro, too.
But, since most of the oil the USA receives comes out of Canada, this is pretty acurate to the oil prices, falling ot rising :
Value of CDN Dollar - Versus US dollar : ( 2 year chart)
Value of CDN Dollar - Versus US dollar : ( 3 month chart):
Re: Obamanation here today
Look at the dollar just for December. It has gones from 93.5 to 96.5 and oil has risen 10 dollars the last 10 days. I do know what your talking about because I have been watching the dollar to oil curves but lately there is something else happening.
klein
Für Meno :)
Re: Obamanation here today
I think you mean the cdn dollar has risen 93.5 to todays value of 96.7 cents to the US in a month.
Meaning last month 1 US dollar bought 1.07 cdn dollars.
Now, it just buys $1.03 cdn dollars.
But, this is nothing, wait until Spring (before summer vacation). Oil at $100 - $120 again, when demand is bigger.
Yes, speculation does play a role on wall street.
But so does China and India, with more people driving cars each and every day.
I don't mind it though. For us, higher oil prices is a huge winfall.
The few cents extra to pay at the pump is well worth it for us.
I think you mean the cdn dollar has risen 93.5 to todays value of 96.7 cents to the US in a month.
Meaning last month 1 US dollar bought 1.07 cdn dollars.
Now, it just buys $1.03 cdn dollars.
But, this is nothing, wait until Spring (before summer vacation). Oil at $100 - $120 again, when demand is bigger.
Yes, speculation does play a role on wall street.
But so does China and India, with more people driving cars each and every day.
I don't mind it though. For us, higher oil prices is a huge winfall.
The few cents extra to pay at the pump is well worth it for us.
Similar threads
