When someone runs out of unemployment benefits then they are no longer counted as unemployed. Most of the 315,000 and their children will not have much of a Christmas. So don't celebrate the drop in unemployment as it is a sham.
Economic Report Archives | Email alerts
Dec. 2, 2011, 11:45 a.m. EST
Jobless rate falls to over 2-year low of 8.6%
Unemployment at lowest level since 2009 as labor force shrinks
The big drop in the jobless rate, which stood at 9.0% in October, stemmed mainly from a decline in the size of the labor force. Some 315,000 people stopped looking for jobs last month, which is usually not a good sign.
The cause of the great depression was too much of the wealth held by the top 1%. No different than now. Most economists that you hear on Fox and the MSM are getting grants from the top 1% who support free trade.
Read what a real academic has to say.
“...“Although the popular view is that tariffs create new jobs, or preserve old ones, most economists believe that the effect of tariffs on the total number of jobs available in an economy as temporary. The overall level of employment in an economy is determined by such factors as the size of the population, the fraction of the population that is of working age, and the choices individuals make with respect to engaging in paid labor as opposed to unpaid labor or leisure. These factors are generally not affected by tariffs.” ...”
“...The best academic minds and the research they have produced point to the fact that the Smoot-Hawley tariffs had a very small impact on making the Great Depression worse. By far, the most damaging aspect of the Great Depression was the 35% decline in the money supply. ...”
More at: economyincrisis org/content/impact-smoot-hawley-tariff-great-depression (replace the space with “.” on the address line to access)
The central bank, historically, has created economic busts in order to advance its agendas, which, among other things, includes profiteering from wars. See “The Creature from Jekyll Island” for the many references on that point.
I cut cable to save money. I listen to radio alot now. Why is it that talk radio is 90% tea party. No wonder that ows is gaining momentum. the tea party is the elite so called 1%.
“...In 1970 the government started to tax the American worker instead of foreign workers by way of tariffs. ...”
It is impossible to eliminate competition, internationally, by government edict, a course which you propose. Rather people must be free to compete in an environment that frees them FROM government regulation. That does more than just level the playing field. It favors those countries and governments that follow such a course because their competitors are too busy dodging the impediments set up by their respective governments. This does not absolve law-breakers, such as Jon Corzine (a Democrat, and card carrying socialist) who would be residing in a jail cell if the US Constitution was still a living document.
We may find some agreement on the issue of central banks (CBs), which is the real crux of the problem. This issue far overshadows any discussion of the arcane differences in the various “isms”. The CBs see to it that their socialist agendas favor those politicians that will regulate in their favor. They are the providers of unlimited fiat currencies that enable them to achieve their objectives. Such currencies are the reason for historically high deficits here and internationally, and why the Dollar has lost 98% of its purchasing power. If any wish to use an “ism” to describe the actions of CBs it could as well be “fascism”, “communism”, “corporatism”, “socialism”... or take you pick. The end game is the same, a shrinking middle class. It was Alan Greenspan who favored the replacement of the Glass-Steagall Act with the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act taking all risk away from the investment banks and placing it on the shoulders of the tax base, be it a direct tax (tax the rich), or the stealthy type know as “inflation”, the real source of wealth to the 1%.
Alan Greenspan said on Gramm-Leach-Bliley: “...if the bank is large and/or a significant part of the organization, both law and good supervisory and stabilization policies require an active umbrella supervisor. That remains the role of the Federal Reserve under the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act. As umbrella supervisor, our major emphasis will be on protecting the bank subsidiary and on the risk management of the consolidated entity, but the information we generate may also be helpful to functional regulators.”
So how did all of this play out? In walks Hank Paulson kneeling before Nancy Pelosi (both Democrats and socialists) in 2008 in the Congress begging for $700+ billions of the Peoples money to bail out the banking industry. That lends the lie to Greenspan’s statement that it would be the Federal Reserve’s task to do the bailing. So you can apply whatever “ism” or “ists” you wish to this, but it is the typical theft that takes place when fiat currencies circulate instead of the money of the US Constitution. THIS, OF COURSE, IS TOTALLY MISSING FROM ALMOST ALL OF THE MASS MEDIA DISCUSSIONS ON ECONOMIC ISSUES. Real money places fiscal discipline on government AND the financial industry. People are free to take their business elsewhere if they sense that some sort of “funny business” is going on.
If you do not want to call them protective tariffs then give then another name. We now have protective tariffs for foreign workers by our taxing American labor but call them payroll taxes and income taxes. How about a balancing tariff. If a product when manufactured by American labor costs X dollars in taxes then put X dollars of tariff on the product when it is manufactured overseas. There was over $4 per hour added to the labor cost through taxes and insurance at the last company I owned. That is the company cost above what the worker took home. $4 per hour is more than the labor cost in many countries.
Do you remember Ross Perot. He was right.
The United States is negotiating one of the biggest free trade agreements in history and there is barely a peep about it on the news. Years ago, Ross Perot warned that if NAFTA was implemented there would be a "giant sucking sound" as millions of jobs left this country. It turns out that he was right.
I am not a Free Trader. I think that those that supported NAFTA and GATT are literally traitors. In fact, I endorse the method for raising revenue to finance the operation of a legitimate federal government as devised by the Founders, i.e., tariffs. But tariffs don't have to be prohibitive in nature and even the rather low ones offer a modicum of protection to whatever the appropriate industry.
Frankly, if your profitability hinges on protective tariffs when otherwise the playing field is relatively level, the profit drain needs to be identified or the concern(s) need to liquidate.
Moreover, trade and tariffs, like in the early and more prosperous days in America, ought to be used to gain concessions/arrangements that forward both American industry and the exportation of American ideals, but not if it jeopardizes the economic circumstance of the American people.
The Free-Trade pushers can write publish all the propaganda books they want. They will not change the facts. In 1970 the government started to tax the American worker instead of foreign workers by way of tariffs. Here is a table of the facts.
Take a good look and you will see that as tariffs went down the payroll tax and income tax went up. This made American labor more expensive and less competitive. It is also self defeating as it drove jobs overseas reducing the base for payroll taxes and income taxes. It also caused the decline of the middle class.
The rich got richer and paid for the publication of propaganda to brain wash people into believing they were rich because Wal-Mart was selling cheap foreign made goodsproducts
What an excellent website. Thanks!
Frédéric Bastiat’s book was collecting dust, and the reminder eliminated that problem.
For those of us who hated Paul Samuelson, but nevertheless had to absorb his bilge for a grade, people like Bastiat were a welcome interlude.
There’s also an old saying, which many times is true. “You can’t teach an old dog new tricks.” (tburke)
Socialism also is a tool to place a supposedly superior and priori claim on the labor and assets of those subjected to its malfeasance.
Someone needs to read Bastiat's "The Law".
It's only 107 pages!!!
“...Yes. There are problems here. But they pale in comparison to those in communist dominated countries. Unfortunately we are moving in the direction of socialism>communism. Take a look at those satellite photos again. If you attach your poltical views to what these photos show that could represent your future. “A picture is worth a thousand words.”
It’s not easy to move those with a narcissistic viewpoint (the elitist meaning) towards one where they realize the value of inclusiveness. Apparently a further statement is required.
As stated a number of times previously, the OWS movement is a symptom of concentrated power in the hands of the banking industry. Unfortunately this movement has had no focus on the real problems created by this over-reaching power in the hands of central bankers, and their super wealthy investors. In fact, the suspicion is that there has been a concerted effort to co-opt the movement so that the real problem of Wall Street corruption does not come front and center. Let’s take just one recent example. That of MF Global and Jon Corzine, who until recently was CEO of that company. He should be in jail, but since he is allied with the Democrat party he is untouchable. Under his watch at MF Global investor funds were stolen from segregated accounts in order to invest in Euro bonds, which tanked and sent the company into bankruptcy.
So you, “tburke”, can characterize any who clearly sees that socialism attempts to cloak itself in sheeps clothing as something other than what it is while attempts are made to show it is the wolf at the door of middle class prosperity. Make no mistake about it. Central bankers are socialists. Just read some of the declarations of the Fabian Society which is filled with them. If they were a disease the patient (most of the rest of mankind) would have to be considered nearly terminal.