Another Good Month On The Jobs Front...unemployment Drops To 5.9%

[Oldstyle]

Economy gains 248 000 jobs as hiring rebounds

The labor market rebounded sharply in September as employers added 248,000 jobs, the second largest gain for any month this year.
The unemployment rate fell to 5.9% from 6.1%, lowest since July 2008, the Labor Department said Friday.

What types of jobs? Are they requiring people to take up more than one job to make a decent living?

THE TYPE THAT GAWWDDDAM 'FREE MARKET' PROVIDES.


The Republican Myth of Obama’s ‘Part-Time America’ Gets Destroyed With One Graph

The president's critics love this talking point. But since 2010, full-time jobs are up 7.6 million, and part-time jobs have declined by more than 900,000.


Here s What Obama s Part-Time America Really Looks Like - The Atlantic

You know what's amusing to me, Dad? You look at that graph as "proof" that ObamaCare didn't cause an increase in part-time employment based on the fact that the ACA went into effect AFTER the huge rise in part-time employment! What that shows ME is that American businesses saw the ACA coming and went to part-time jobs instead of full-time jobs in advance of the start of ACA regulations kicking in.

 

[Oldstyle]

Whqt are you saying? The labor partician later does count anymore? The fact is a smaller percentage of Americans are working today then when Obozo took office.

What I am saying is that conservatives paid no attention to the Labor Participation Rate when it was plummeting under Bush

Why? Because it has been expected to drop for the last 50 years. Baby boomers are retiring and dropping out of the workforce

Stop being an ass Rocko and be glad that we had good employment numbers last month

I guess you don't get much for $7,000,000,000,000 n new debt...

lol

We have added $26 trillion to household wealth since Obama has been president

Link?

Household wealth rises 1.7 to record level

"But the wealth gains are flowing mainly to affluent Americans. Broad stock market averages have jumped more than 150% from their trough in the spring of 2009. But roughly 10% of households own about 80% of stocks."

The rich got richer...and the Middle Class continues to get screwed by this Administration. Remember that the next time you see Barry waxing eloquent on how much he's THERE for the Middle Class! It's all political theater!

 

[LoneLaugher]

Economy gains 248 000 jobs as hiring rebounds

The labor market rebounded sharply in September as employers added 248,000 jobs, the second largest gain for any month this year.
The unemployment rate fell to 5.9% from 6.1%, lowest since July 2008, the Labor Department said Friday.

What types of jobs? Are they requiring people to take up more than one job to make a decent living?

THE TYPE THAT GAWWDDDAM 'FREE MARKET' PROVIDES.


The Republican Myth of Obama’s ‘Part-Time America’ Gets Destroyed With One Graph

The president's critics love this talking point. But since 2010, full-time jobs are up 7.6 million, and part-time jobs have declined by more than 900,000.


Here s What Obama s Part-Time America Really Looks Like - The Atlantic

You know what's amusing to me, Dad? You look at that graph as "proof" that ObamaCare didn't cause an increase in part-time employment based on the fact that the ACA went into effect AFTER the huge rise in part-time employment! What that shows ME is that American businesses saw the ACA coming and went to part-time jobs instead of full-time jobs in advance of the start of ACA regulations kicking in.

That's ridiculous. Prove it.

 

[Dad2three]

What I am saying is that conservatives paid no attention to the Labor Participation Rate when it was plummeting under Bush

Why? Because it has been expected to drop for the last 50 years. Baby boomers are retiring and dropping out of the workforce

Stop being an ass Rocko and be glad that we had good employment numbers last month

I guess you don't get much for $7,000,000,000,000 n new debt...

lol

We have added $26 trillion to household wealth since Obama has been president

Link?

Household wealth rises 1.7 to record level

"But the wealth gains are flowing mainly to affluent Americans. Broad stock market averages have jumped more than 150% from their trough in the spring of 2009. But roughly 10% of households own about 80% of stocks."

The rich got richer...and the Middle Class continues to get screwed by this Administration. Remember that the next time you see Barry waxing eloquent on how much he's THERE for the Middle Class! It's all political theater!

lol

80% of the population owns 5% of the wealth.

Who Rules America Wealth Income and Power

The middle class has been eviscerated.

Neo-Liberalism/Conservatives is/has destroyed the
American Economy in favor of the so called "Job Creator"... In reality are "Job Exporters"...


"We crashed the economy but we don't like the way you tried to fix it." - GOP.
http://jonsfact.blogspot.com/2014/01/80-of-population-owns-5-of-wealth.html#

 

[Dad2three]

Economy gains 248 000 jobs as hiring rebounds

The labor market rebounded sharply in September as employers added 248,000 jobs, the second largest gain for any month this year.
The unemployment rate fell to 5.9% from 6.1%, lowest since July 2008, the Labor Department said Friday.

What types of jobs? Are they requiring people to take up more than one job to make a decent living?

THE TYPE THAT GAWWDDDAM 'FREE MARKET' PROVIDES.


The Republican Myth of Obama’s ‘Part-Time America’ Gets Destroyed With One Graph

The president's critics love this talking point. But since 2010, full-time jobs are up 7.6 million, and part-time jobs have declined by more than 900,000.


Here s What Obama s Part-Time America Really Looks Like - The Atlantic

You know what's amusing to me, Dad? You look at that graph as "proof" that ObamaCare didn't cause an increase in part-time employment based on the fact that the ACA went into effect AFTER the huge rise in part-time employment! What that shows ME is that American businesses saw the ACA coming and went to part-time jobs instead of full-time jobs in advance of the start of ACA regulations kicking in.

Sure, Dubya's great recession and the economy retracting over 9% his last quarter had nothing to do with it, those 'job creators' were just good planners, lol

s

 

[Papageorgio]

These people would like to kill every White person they see.

Starting with you I would imagine. And why not? Be afraid, be very afraid. Black people are COMING TO GIT YA.
LMAO. You a weird dude.

Any different from Lewis being terrified of the Tea Party? Very funny!


Sent from my iPad using an Android.

 

[Dad2three]

Or elect a republican house and senate who controlled Clintons spending for 7 of his 8 years.

It peaked under Clinton. And then started falling. Congress didn't change.

Congress changed in 2007 you miserable asshole.

Pelosi took over in 2007, and the unemployment rate was 4.6 percent.

You stupid illiterate dick.

Just ONE bill that substantially changed Dubya's policies? lol

MORON


Q When did the Bush Mortgage Bubble start?

A The general timeframe is it started late 2004.

From Bush’s President’s Working Group on Financial Markets October 2008

“The Presidents Working Group’s March policy statement acknowledged that turmoil in financial markets clearly was triggered by a dramatic weakening of underwriting standards for U.S. subprime mortgages, beginning in late 2004 and extending into 2007.”
FACTS on Dubya s great recession US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

This actually started on Clintons watch. And, what did anything that Bush did cause a decline in home prices?

The U.S.subprime mortgage crisis was a nationwide banking emergency that coincided with the U.S. recession of December 2007-June 2009. It was triggered by a large decline in home prices, resulting in mortgage delinquencies and foreclosures and the devaluation of housing-related securities.

Subprime mortgages grew from 5% of total originations ($35 billion) in 1994,to 20% ($600 billion) in 2006

In 1998 Brooksley E. Born, head of theCommodity Futures Trading Commission, put forth a policy paper asking for feedback from regulators, lobbyists, legislators on the question of whether derivatives should be reported, sold through a central facility, or whether capital requirements should be required of their buyers. Greenspan, Rubin, and Levitt pressured her to withdraw the paper and Greenspan persuaded Congress to pass a resolution preventing CFTC from regulating derivatives for another six months — when Born's term of office would expire.Ultimately, it was the collapse of a specific kind of derivative, the mortgage-backed security, that triggered the economic crisis of 2008.

Exactly. I wish more people grasped this. It wasn't all derivatives. The types of derivatives that do not have capital requirements, are the types that did not crash.

The types that crashed were mortgage backed securities, and specifically, sub-prime mortgage backed securities. And those securities do have capital requirements. All the requirements in the world, would not have prevented the crash.

A lot of people don't get this either. Capital requirements in Europe and Canada, are *LOWER* than they are here.... and yet the crash stated HERE. The problem was not a lack of regulation. The problem was regulation that pushed bad loans.

MORE garbage. I'm shocked, no really I am

PLEASE tell me what regulations Dubya/GOP passed that required this to happen:

It would've been 2003?

YOU KNOW WHERE WE WENT FROM ABOUT $200 TO OVER $600 BILLION A YEAR IN SUBPRIMES?

One president controlled the regulators that not only let banks stop checking income but cheered them on. And as president Bush could enact the very policies that caused the Bush Mortgage Bubble and he did. And his party controlled congress.


It is clear to anyone who has studied the financial crisis of 2008 that the private sector’s drive for short-term profit was behind it.

More than 84 percent of the sub-prime mortgages in 2006 were issued by private lending. These private firms made nearly 83 percent of the subprime loans to low- and moderate-income borrowers that year. Out of the top 25 subprime lenders in 2006, only one was subject to the usual mortgage laws and regulations.

The nonbank underwriters made more than 12 million subprime mortgages with a value of nearly $2 trillion.

The lenders who made these were exempt from federal regulations.


Lest We Forget Why We Had A Financial Crisis - Forbes

 

[Dad2three]

The labor participation rate peaked under President Clinton.

So all you RWnuts obsessing on the labor participation rate have to concede that the best president in that regard would be to elect another Bill Clinton.

Clinton had a Republican Congress and an unprecedented boom in the dotcom bubble that went south shortly after he left office. Unlike Obama, Clinton paid attention to the Congress and negotiated and compromised.

Sure, must have been why GOPers shut doiwn the Gov't, TWICE and impeached Clinton

The economy was good, IN SPITE of GOP nonsense, AFTER Clinton's/Dems first surplus the GOP passed a $700+ billion tax cut Clinton had to veto to get 3 more, then Dubya came in and had 6 years of GOP Congress to fuck EVERYTHING up!

The economy was doing OK until the Democrats came into power in 2007.

PLEASE, PRETTY PLEASE GIVE ME ONE BILL THEY PASSED THAT CAUSED DUBYA'S PONZI SCHEME TO POP?

Q When did the Bush Mortgage Bubble start?

A The general timeframe is it started late 2004.

From Bush’s President’s Working Group on Financial Markets October 2008

“The Presidents Working Group’s March policy statement acknowledged that turmoil in financial markets clearly was triggered by a dramatic weakening of underwriting standards for U.S. subprime mortgages, beginning in late 2004 and extending into 2007.”


FACTS on Dubya s great recession US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

WINGNUT!

 

[Dad2three]

The labor participation rate peaked under President Clinton.

So all you RWnuts obsessing on the labor participation rate have to concede that the best president in that regard would be to elect another Bill Clinton.

Or elect a republican house and senate who controlled Clintons spending for 7 of his 8 years.

It peaked under Clinton. And then started falling. Congress didn't change.

Congress changed in 2007 you miserable asshole.

Pelosi took over in 2007, and the unemployment rate was 4.6 percent.

You stupid illiterate dick.

Just ONE bill that substantially changed Dubya's policies? lol

MORON


Q When did the Bush Mortgage Bubble start?

A The general timeframe is it started late 2004.

From Bush’s President’s Working Group on Financial Markets October 2008

“The Presidents Working Group’s March policy statement acknowledged that turmoil in financial markets clearly was triggered by a dramatic weakening of underwriting standards for U.S. subprime mortgages, beginning in late 2004 and extending into 2007.”
FACTS on Dubya s great recession US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

This actually started on Clintons watch. And, what did anything that Bush did cause a decline in home prices?

The U.S.subprime mortgage crisis was a nationwide banking emergency that coincided with the U.S. recession of December 2007-June 2009. It was triggered by a large decline in home prices, resulting in mortgage delinquencies and foreclosures and the devaluation of housing-related securities.

Subprime mortgages grew from 5% of total originations ($35 billion) in 1994,to 20% ($600 billion) in 2006

In 1998 Brooksley E. Born, head of theCommodity Futures Trading Commission, put forth a policy paper asking for feedback from regulators, lobbyists, legislators on the question of whether derivatives should be reported, sold through a central facility, or whether capital requirements should be required of their buyers. Greenspan, Rubin, and Levitt pressured her to withdraw the paper and Greenspan persuaded Congress to pass a resolution preventing CFTC from regulating derivatives for another six months — when Born's term of office would expire.Ultimately, it was the collapse of a specific kind of derivative, the mortgage-backed security, that triggered the economic crisis of 2008.

CLINTON HUH? lol



Q When did the Bush Mortgage Bubble start?

A The general timeframe is it started late 2004.

From Bush’s President’s Working Group on Financial Markets October 2008

“The Presidents Working Group’s March policy statement acknowledged that turmoil in financial markets clearly was triggered by a dramatic weakening of underwriting standards for U.S. subprime mortgages, beginning in late 2004 and extending into 2007.”



Q Did the Community Reinvestment Act under Carter/Clinton caused it?


A "Since 1995 there has been essentially no change in the basic CRA rules or enforcement process that can be reasonably linked to the subprime lending activity. This fact weakens the link between the CRA and the current crisis since the crisis is rooted in poor performance of mortgage loans made between 2004 and 2007. "

http://www.federalreserve.gov/newsevents/speech/20081203_analysis.pdf

LOOK AT THIS CHART AND TELL ME IT WAS CLINTON

Right-wingers Want To Erase How George Bush's "Homeowner Society" Helped Cause The Economic Collapse


2004 Republican Convention:

Another priority for a new term is to build an ownership society, because ownership brings security and dignity and independence.
...

Thanks to our policies, home ownership in America is at an all- time high.

(APPLAUSE)

Tonight we set a new goal: 7 million more affordable homes in the next 10 years, so more American families will be able to open the door and say, "Welcome to my home."


June 17, 2004


Builders to fight Bush's low-income plan


NEW YORK (CNN/Money) - Home builders, realtors and others are preparing to fight a Bush administration plan that would require Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to increase financing of homes for low-income people, a home builder group said Thursday.


UNDER DUBYA, HOUSEHOLD DEBT DOUBLED IN HIS FIRST 7 YEARS, ANY GROWTH IN WAGES? lol

 

[Dad2three]

Hey Rabid, considering what Bush gave us in his two terms, and where we are at today in the market and employment, I would have to say that President Obama is a resounding success when compared to his predessor. In fact, given what the President was facing when he took office, a resounding success compared to just about any President.

Yeah, except the unemployment rate was 4.6 percent and the dow was over 14000 (not driven by ZIRP Zero Interest Rate policy but you have no clue what that even means) the last time the republicans had majority of the power.

The democrats took over majority of the power and have had it since 2007. The democrats DELIBERATELY ignored ALL of the presidents warnings (17 of them in 2008 alone). The congress controls the spending which means they control the purse strings.

The economy took a shit under democrat control, regardless of who was in the white house. This may come as a shock to obamabots, but the president is not a KING. He has limited powers. At least that was the way it was before obama took over.

Bush, in his last two years was a lame duck president who also did not have republican majority in the House or Senate.

Every single one of you liberals are ignorant as hell for blaming ONLY BOOOOOOSH for the collapse of 2008. ALL OF YOU are brainwashed sacks of shit. All of you are in the same boat. All of you are morons.

I think it is funny how you all believe anything that comes out of this administration, considering how they have lied about EVERYTHING.

You can keep your plan. You can keep your doctor. You will save $2500 from obamacare. It was all spontaneous because of a video. Ebola is unlikely to come here.

You are all wastes of shit, no exceptions.

You are completely clueless! Presidents have far more power than you are giving them credit for. It takes a lot of votes to go against the prez. The presidents working group & cabinet control markets, jobs, prices, rules, enforcement, etc. Look at the financial disaster Bush caused when his cabinet stopped enforcement of rules & squashed creation of the CFPB that Clinton & congress designated to take over regulations gutted by the Gramm Leach Bliley Act & Commodity Futures Aodernization Act. The Bush Administration caused the financial meltdown. Madoff made a mockery of the Bush Administration. Financial Professionals had no accountability & raped the public at will.

Presidents have less power than you give them credit for. I know you are mistaking your pathetic commie in chief.

There are MANY LIMITATIONS that the president has, especially when his party is not in control of congress, who are the ones that control the purse strings.

Yeah, ok. You do not in any way see after Pelosi and the democrats took control of the House and democrats took control of the senate means little. Even if, the economy imploded AFTER they took over.

Of course they were all just little innocent little fawns trying to do the right thing for the poor and impoverished and EVIL white republicans would not allow them to do it.

That is what you believe and that is all you believe. The economy was a bipartisan problem you fucking left wing hack.

In the mean time, you all fucking yell like Tarzan from the trees about 5.9 percent while you all yawned about the 4.6 percent in 2006.

You motherfuckers.

 

[Dad2three]

Hey Rabid, considering what Bush gave us in his two terms, and where we are at today in the market and employment, I would have to say that President Obama is a resounding success when compared to his predessor. In fact, given what the President was facing when he took office, a resounding success compared to just about any President.

Yeah, except the unemployment rate was 4.6 percent and the dow was over 14000 (not driven by ZIRP Zero Interest Rate policy but you have no clue what that even means) the last time the republicans had majority of the power.

The democrats took over majority of the power and have had it since 2007. The democrats DELIBERATELY ignored ALL of the presidents warnings (17 of them in 2008 alone). The congress controls the spending which means they control the purse strings.

The economy took a shit under democrat control, regardless of who was in the white house. This may come as a shock to obamabots, but the president is not a KING. He has limited powers. At least that was the way it was before obama took over.

Bush, in his last two years was a lame duck president who also did not have republican majority in the House or Senate.

Every single one of you liberals are ignorant as hell for blaming ONLY BOOOOOOSH for the collapse of 2008. ALL OF YOU are brainwashed sacks of shit. All of you are in the same boat. All of you are morons.

I think it is funny how you all believe anything that comes out of this administration, considering how they have lied about EVERYTHING.

You can keep your plan. You can keep your doctor. You will save $2500 from obamacare. It was all spontaneous because of a video. Ebola is unlikely to come here.

You are all wastes of shit, no exceptions.

You are completely clueless! Presidents have far more power than you are giving them credit for. It takes a lot of votes to go against the prez. The presidents working group & cabinet control markets, jobs, prices, rules, enforcement, etc. Look at the financial disaster Bush caused when his cabinet stopped enforcement of rules & squashed creation of the CFPB that Clinton & congress designated to take over regulations gutted by the Gramm Leach Bliley Act & Commodity Futures Aodernization Act. The Bush Administration caused the financial meltdown. Madoff made a mockery of the Bush Administration. Financial Professionals had no accountability & raped the public at will.

Presidents have less power than you give them credit for. I know you are mistaking your pathetic commie in chief.

There are MANY LIMITATIONS that the president has, especially when his party is not in control of congress, who are the ones that control the purse strings.

Yeah, ok. You do not in any way see after Pelosi and the democrats took control of the House and democrats took control of the senate means little. Even if, the economy imploded AFTER they took over.

Of course they were all just little innocent little fawns trying to do the right thing for the poor and impoverished and EVIL white republicans would not allow them to do it.

That is what you believe and that is all you believe. The economy was a bipartisan problem you fucking left wing hack.

In the mean time, you all fucking yell like Tarzan from the trees about 5.9 percent while you all yawned about the 4.6 percent in 2006.

You motherfuckers.

ONE BILL the Dems passec that caused Dubya's ponzi scheme to crash? JUST ONE? lol

Stupid motherfuckkking conservatives ALWAYS lie


Right-wingers Want To Erase How George Bush's "Homeowner Society" Helped Cause The Economic Collapse


2004 Republican Convention:

Another priority for a new term is to build an ownership society, because ownership brings security and dignity and independence.
...

Thanks to our policies, home ownership in America is at an all- time high.

(APPLAUSE)

Tonight we set a new goal: 7 million more affordable homes in the next 10 years, so more American families will be able to open the door and say, "Welcome to my home."


June 17, 2004


Builders to fight Bush's low-income plan


NEW YORK (CNN/Money) - Home builders, realtors and others are preparing to fight a Bush administration plan that would require Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to increase financing of homes for low-income people, a home builder group said Thursday.


Home builders fight Bush's low-income housing - Jun. 17, 2004


Predatory Lenders' Partner in Crime

Predatory lending was widely understood to present a looming national crisis.

What did the Bush administration do in response? Did it reverse course and decide to take action to halt this burgeoning scourge?

Not only did the Bush administration do nothing to protect consumers, it embarked on an aggressive and unprecedented campaign to prevent states from protecting their residents from the very problems to which the federal government was turning a blind eye

In 2003, during the height of the predatory lending crisis, the OCC invoked a clause from the 1863 National Bank Act to issue formal opinions preempting all state predatory lending laws, thereby rendering them inoperative


Eliot Spitzer - Predatory Lenders' Partner in Crime

FACTS on Dubya s great recession US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

 

[Dad2three]

Or elect a republican house and senate who controlled Clintons spending for 7 of his 8 years.

It peaked under Clinton. And then started falling. Congress didn't change.

Congress changed in 2007 you miserable asshole.

Pelosi took over in 2007, and the unemployment rate was 4.6 percent.

You stupid illiterate dick.

Just ONE bill that substantially changed Dubya's policies? lol

MORON


Q When did the Bush Mortgage Bubble start?

A The general timeframe is it started late 2004.

From Bush’s President’s Working Group on Financial Markets October 2008

“The Presidents Working Group’s March policy statement acknowledged that turmoil in financial markets clearly was triggered by a dramatic weakening of underwriting standards for U.S. subprime mortgages, beginning in late 2004 and extending into 2007.”
FACTS on Dubya s great recession US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

This actually started on Clintons watch. And, what did anything that Bush did cause a decline in home prices?

The U.S.subprime mortgage crisis was a nationwide banking emergency that coincided with the U.S. recession of December 2007-June 2009. It was triggered by a large decline in home prices, resulting in mortgage delinquencies and foreclosures and the devaluation of housing-related securities.

Subprime mortgages grew from 5% of total originations ($35 billion) in 1994,to 20% ($600 billion) in 2006

In 1998 Brooksley E. Born, head of theCommodity Futures Trading Commission, put forth a policy paper asking for feedback from regulators, lobbyists, legislators on the question of whether derivatives should be reported, sold through a central facility, or whether capital requirements should be required of their buyers. Greenspan, Rubin, and Levitt pressured her to withdraw the paper and Greenspan persuaded Congress to pass a resolution preventing CFTC from regulating derivatives for another six months — when Born's term of office would expire.Ultimately, it was the collapse of a specific kind of derivative, the mortgage-backed security, that triggered the economic crisis of 2008.

Exactly. I wish more people grasped this. It wasn't all derivatives. The types of derivatives that do not have capital requirements, are the types that did not crash.

The types that crashed were mortgage backed securities, and specifically, sub-prime mortgage backed securities. And those securities do have capital requirements. All the requirements in the world, would not have prevented the crash.

A lot of people don't get this either. Capital requirements in Europe and Canada, are *LOWER* than they are here.... and yet the crash stated HERE. The problem was not a lack of regulation. The problem was regulation that pushed bad loans.

You REALLY are a stupid fuck aren't you?


One president controlled the regulators that not only let banks stop checking income but cheered them on. And as president Bush could enact the very policies that caused the Bush Mortgage Bubble and he did. And his party controlled congress.


The Bush Mortgage Bubble wasn’t about home prices. It was about banks lowering their lending standards and Bush’s regulators cheering them on. That started late 2004 after Bush preempted all state laws against predatory lending (to name one of his many toxic housing policies) and his successful reelection campaign touting the strength of his housing market.



FACTS on Dubya s great recession US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

 

[Dad2three]

Also remember that working at Burger King is classified as a "manufacturing job" because according to Dept. of Labor your ate manufacturing a Whopper.

Liar. CREDIBLE link?

In the New Economics Fast-Food Factories - New York Times
There ya go fucko. Well...fast food workers have been going on strike and wearing red ...identifying with socialist party USA. Hmmmmmm, what a coincidence. Gotta keep union dues and $$$$$$ rolling into Democrats somehow.

LOL, OK, DUBYA ASKED THAT, AND NO IT WASN'T THE BLM AS YOU POSITED. I'm shocked you lied AGAIN

N. Gregory Mankiw, chairman of the president's Council of Economic Advisers, (under Dubya) is FARRRR right. Weird you Klowns wanted to change the definition right? lol

 

[Oldstyle]

I guess you don't get much for $7,000,000,000,000 n new debt...

lol

We have added $26 trillion to household wealth since Obama has been president

Link?

Household wealth rises 1.7 to record level

"But the wealth gains are flowing mainly to affluent Americans. Broad stock market averages have jumped more than 150% from their trough in the spring of 2009. But roughly 10% of households own about 80% of stocks."

The rich got richer...and the Middle Class continues to get screwed by this Administration. Remember that the next time you see Barry waxing eloquent on how much he's THERE for the Middle Class! It's all political theater!

lol

80% of the population owns 5% of the wealth.

Who Rules America Wealth Income and Power

The middle class has been eviscerated.

Neo-Liberalism/Conservatives is/has destroyed the
American Economy in favor of the so called "Job Creator"... In reality are "Job Exporters"...


"We crashed the economy but we don't like the way you tried to fix it." - GOP.

Dude, the Middle Class has been "eviscerated" by the Obama Administration not by the GOP! Under Barack Obama the richest Americans got much richer and the Middle Class got poorer.

Jobs are being exported because the US has the highest Corporate tax rate in the world and you Progressives are too stubborn to admit that not lowering it is costing the US jobs and business growth.

Did ANY of you liberals take economics in college? It's obvious that Barry didn't...

 

[Oldstyle]

Your coming on here and spamming misleading statistics won't change the abysmal job that the Obama Administration has done with economic growth and job creation.

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

Labor participation rate at a 36 year low woot!

You don't sound happy about the good news Rocko

You are not one of those rooting for the economy to fail are you?

I'm one of those hoping you stupid fucks asleep at the wheel wake up.

 

[Dad2three]

Alan Greenspan has famously testified before Congress that the reason he did nothing to stop this rapid growth in unconventional mortgages is that he believed banks would not have made these loans if they thought they were too risky.


There were two main reasons banks pursued these risky subprime loans so aggressively. The first, which we discuss at greater length below, is that there were fewer and fewer loans left to sell in the saturated prime market. The other reason is that subprime origination and securitization turned out to be enormously profitable

According to a study by the consulting firm Mercer Oliver Wyman, nonconventional lending accounted for approximately half of originations in 2005, but over 85% of profits



...The American mortgage market was about $500 billion in 1990. During the 1990s, it went up to nearly $1 trillion in 1993, peaked in 1998 at around $1.5 trillion. In 2000, it stood at $1 trillion a year. The real surge in the mortgage market began in 2001 (the year of the stock market crash). From 2000 -2004, residential originations the U.S. climbed from about $1 trillion to almost $4 trillion.


After 2003, the major banks' strategies pointed increasingly toward subprime and other non-conventional mortgage segments.


In 2004, for the first time, these four categories of loans exceeded the prime market or conventional market. In 2001, the largest conventional (prime, government-insured) originator did 91% of its origination business in the conventional market, and only 9% in the non-prime market.


By 2005 the largest conventional originator was doing less than half of its origination business within the conventional sector (Inside Mortgage Finance 2009). In the peak of the mortgage craze in 2006, fully 70% of all loans that were made were unconventional mortgages.


http://www.tobinproject.org/sites/tobinproject.org/files/assets/Fligstein_Catalyst of Disaster_0.pdf

The subprime loans were part of a problem, I never said it wasn't, however the causes were started in the 40's and culminated in 2001 and then 2008 when it could not survive any longer. When people in the 90's were charging up their credit limits, and then take out 125% mortgage on their home and payoff loans, then go out and take out more loans and more bad debt, it is going to snowball. 2000 and 2001's economic issues were coming to a head and 9/11 should have been the end.

Again, I don't dispute what happened in the year preceding 2008, I am saying it was not the start. It started decades before.

Also you last links targets the change was in 93, long before Bush.

NONSENSE. That's just right wing bullshit,m the DIRECT cause of the WORLD WIDE bubble was the Banksters ability to create loans early 2000's WORLD WIDE, using 'financialization' of new loan products, think derivatives and MBS's. In the US, it was Dubya allowing household debt to double in his first 7 years, as wages stagnated. In 2006 for the first time ever, the US spent more than we actually made


ONCE MORE:

In 2001, the largest conventional (prime, government-insured) originator did 91% of its origination business in the conventional market, and only 9% in the non-prime market.

By 2005 the largest conventional originator was doing less than half of its origination business within the conventional sector (Inside Mortgage Finance 2009). In the peak of the mortgage craze in 2006, fully 70% of all loans that were made were unconventional mortgages.


This meant in a very short period of time, banks reoriented housing finance–one of the largest industries in the economy–around securitizations of highly risky loans. This astounding change in the character of the mortgage market was noticed by regulators and Congress. But, the Federal Reserve, Congress and the Executive branch chose to ignore what was going on


http://www.tobinproject.org/sites/tobinproject.org/files/assets/Fligstein_Catalyst of Disaster_0.pdf


NO, IT WASN'T THE 1940'S, FDR, REAGAN, CLINTON, ETC. Grow a brain


The same exact thing happened at the exact same time in the sub prime auto finance business. And it was done by the same exact people. Difference is that there are buybacks in auto finance ABSs much stricter than in the mortgage industry.

The big players all went down. HSBC lost billions and went out of the business. Americredit all but went bankrupt and only survived with a buyout. Cap One went through the basement and was only kept alive because of their credit card profits. Dozens of others, some backed by huge corps, went under.

Now jump to insults. Typical for the left when they are losing.

How is losing pointing out YOUR premises is BULLSHIT based on right wing nonsense that only kooks who follow the likes of the Pauls or Savage believes is credible? I bet the intersts rates are taking off soon now, heard that for over a decade from you Klowns too, lol


Out of Control Financial Innovation


By now the litany is familiar: the old model of banking, in which banks held on to the loans they made, was replaced by the new practice of originate-and-distribute. Mortgage originators—which in many cases had no traditional banking business—made loans to buy houses, then quickly sold those loans off to other firms. These firms then repackaged those loans by pooling them, then selling shares of these pools of securities; and rating agencies were willing to label the resulting product chicken—that is, to bestow their seal of approval, the AAA rating, on the more senior of these securities, those that had first claim on interest and principal repayment.

Everyone ignored both the risks posed by a general housing bust and the degradation of underwriting standards as the bubble inflated (that ignorance was no doubt assisted by the huge amounts of money being made). When the bust came, much of that AAA paper turned out to be worth just pennies on the dollar.




The Slump Goes On Why by Paul Krugman and Robin Wells The New York Review of Books


Q When did the Bush Mortgage Bubble start?

A The general timeframe is it started late 2004.

From Bush’s President’s Working Group on Financial Markets October 2008

“The Presidents Working Group’s March policy statement acknowledged that turmoil in financial markets clearly was triggered by a dramatic weakening of underwriting standards for U.S. subprime mortgages, beginning in late 2004 and extending into 2007.”

Don't know who Pauls or Savage are and I don't much care, your links contradict each other, and you are calling me names. So, at this point I figure you don't know much about the 90's or what really happened nor do you care because your links reference the start of the 90's as the issue. Try going beyond 2000 for some answers. Until you do, you are pointless to discuss the matter as you only want to blame Bush.

https://thenextrecession.files.wordpress.com/2012/08/the-causes-of-the-great-recession.pdf

What Really Spurred the Great Recession - Globalization and the U.S. dollar are as much to blame as banks

MORE libertarian bullshit from you I'm shocked. Banksters created the recession, cheered on by Dubya, EVERY credible orginization that looked at the WORLD WIDE CREDIT BUBBLE AND BUST, put the blame on the 2000's AND securitization, EVERY ONE!!!

BANKSTERS WENT INTO THE SELLING OF MONEY THEY BUNDLED AND SOLD OFF, THEN OFTEN TIMES BET AGAINST!!!


Abstract:



U.S. policymakers often treat market competition as a panacea. However, in the case of mortgage securitization, policymakers’ faith in competition is misplaced. Competitive mortgage securitization has been tried three times in U.S. history - during the 1880s, the 1920s, and the 2000s - and every time it has failed.


Most recently, competition between mortgage securitizers led to a race to the bottom on mortgage underwriting standards that ended in the late 2000s financial crisis. This article provides original evidence that when competition was less intense and securitizers had more market power, securitizers acted to monitor mortgage originators and to maintain prudent underwriting. However, securitizers’ ability to monitor originators and maintain high standards was undermined as competition shifted market power away from securitizers and toward originators. Although standards declined across the market, the largest and most powerful of the mortgage securitizers, the Government Sponsored Enterprises (“GSEs”), remained more successful than other mortgage securitizers at maintaining prudent underwriting.


Competition and Crisis in Mortgage Securitization by Michael Simkovic SSRN


Examining the big lie: How the facts of the economic crisis stack up

•The boom and bust was global. Proponents of the Big Lie ignore the worldwide nature of the housing boom and bust.

Examining the big lie How the facts of the economic crisis stack up The Big Picture



JUNE 2005

The worldwide rise in house prices is the biggest bubble in history. Prepare for the economic pain when it pops

NEVER before have real house prices risen so fast, for so long, in so many countries. Property markets have been frothing from America, Britain and Australia to France, Spain and China. Rising property prices helped to prop up the world economy after the stockmarket bubble burst in 2000. What if the housing boom now turns to bust?

According to estimates by The Economist, the total value of residential property in developed economies rose by more than $30 trillion over the past five years, to over $70 trillion, an increase equivalent to 100% of those countries' combined GDPs. Not only does this dwarf any previous house-price boom, it is larger than the global stockmarket bubble in the late 1990s (an increase over five years of 80% of GDP) or America's stockmarket bubble in the late 1920s (55% of GDP).

In other words, it looks like the biggest bubble in history.

The global housing boom In come the waves The Economist

 

[Dad2three]

Hey Rabid, considering what Bush gave us in his two terms, and where we are at today in the market and employment, I would have to say that President Obama is a resounding success when compared to his predessor. In fact, given what the President was facing when he took office, a resounding success compared to just about any President.

Yeah, except the unemployment rate was 4.6 percent and the dow was over 14000 (not driven by ZIRP Zero Interest Rate policy but you have no clue what that even means) the last time the republicans had majority of the power.

The democrats took over majority of the power and have had it since 2007. The democrats DELIBERATELY ignored ALL of the presidents warnings (17 of them in 2008 alone). The congress controls the spending which means they control the purse strings.

The economy took a shit under democrat control, regardless of who was in the white house. This may come as a shock to obamabots, but the president is not a KING. He has limited powers. At least that was the way it was before obama took over.

Bush, in his last two years was a lame duck president who also did not have republican majority in the House or Senate.

Every single one of you liberals are ignorant as hell for blaming ONLY BOOOOOOSH for the collapse of 2008. ALL OF YOU are brainwashed sacks of shit. All of you are in the same boat. All of you are morons.

I think it is funny how you all believe anything that comes out of this administration, considering how they have lied about EVERYTHING.

You can keep your plan. You can keep your doctor. You will save $2500 from obamacare. It was all spontaneous because of a video. Ebola is unlikely to come here.

You are all wastes of shit, no exceptions.

Got it, you can't provide ONE law the Dems passed that changed Dubya's policies, AND you can't refute his policies led DIRECTLY to the ponzi scheme the Banksters created as Dubya cheered them on!

PLEASE grow a brain or die quickly!

 

[Dad2three]

Also remember that working at Burger King is classified as a "manufacturing job" because according to Dept. of Labor your ate manufacturing a Whopper.

You Lie!

Link?

He gave me a link, it was Dubya and his economic team that TALKED about changing it to manufacturing in 2004, BECAUSE they had such a pathetic economy, until Dubya cheered on his subprime bubble, even that was the worst economy in decades, EVEN if you leave out 2008, lol

 

[Dad2three]

Your coming on here and spamming misleading statistics won't change the abysmal job that the Obama Administration has done with economic growth and job creation.

Is it 'job creators' that create jobs or the Prez?




Hell, IF the 'job creators' don't do it, why are their effective tax rates less than half of what they were in the 1940-'s and 1950's? Yes, Dubya lost over 1,000,000+ PRIVATE sector jobs in 8 years, Obamaa has had over 6.6 million NET created under him, so of course it's the socialists who is the problem, lol