Can someone seriously explain this to me.

[darthtang aw]

Ok, our president and others in his administration say the economy is growing. Yet each month we have lost more and more jobs....so if the economy is growing would we not be showing job loss each month. Be honest....state the recession is slowing down, but by no means is the economy growing...to grow you have to have a business increase and there are very few companies/businesses that are showing any steady growth...they may have stabilized and leveled out...but they are NOT growing.

 

[cocoacf]

Originally Posted by Darthtang AW
http:///forum/post/3214229
Ok, our president and others in his administration say the economy is growing. Yet each month we have lost more and more jobs....so if the economy is growing would we not be showing job loss each month. Be honest....state the recession is slowing down, but by no means is the economy growing...to grow you have to have a business increase and there are very few companies/businesses that are showing any steady growth...they may have stabilized and leveled out...but they are NOT growing.
Know how if a rumor is leaked about a company, the stock either explodes or fails miserably? (Depending on the nature of the rumor of course). For example, apples has exploded with rumors of the new Tablet.
I'd put my money on the fact that big O figures if he says something enough that he can trick people into believing its true, just like in the stock market.

 

[reefraff]

You would have to dig deep into productivity and output numbers to really make the case there is significant growth. Most of the stuff I follow for the stock market seems to show things are getting better but I don't think I would call it growth. I know around here housing prices has slid a little since last fall.

 

[darthtang aw]

Even our trade deficit has increased steadily.....Meaning people are looking for cheaper items.....meaning the jobs within country will countinue to decline.

 

[ironeagle2006]

You can not prove it in the Transportation industry. Considering that last month 1400 trucks came off the road when one company folded. Now there are reports that ANOTHER major company is about to fold. Even overseas airlines are having companies are having problems JAL the LARGEST ASIAN airline is Bankrupt. I am hearing from friends that work were I used to at a Major Hotel chain that they are having problems and might be out of work soon. Think a famous woman that says That's hot alot for the Company.

 

[jackri]

Short term the market is nothing but an emotional roller coaster. Why do you think the market jumped 120 points when they elected Brown? It meant nothing of actual numbers coming in but the emotional ride fo the day. I blame day traders

 

[lovethesea]

Originally Posted by Cocoacf
http:///forum/post/3214234
I'd put my money on the fact that big O figures if he says something enough that he can trick people into believing its true, .

 

[slf125]

Not that I necessarily agree that the economy is growing again, it is true that job growth lags behind economic growth 12- 18 months.
Second, the stock market jumped 120 points soon after the polls opened, not when he was elected. In fact, the following day when it was confirmed he had won the stock market had it's largest drop since october.
I am by no means an expert but hopefully that helps clear things up a little.

 

[reefraff]

The market dropped when Obama started speaking about what they are going to do to the banks. Not sure if it is really connected of not.
You don't want to watch so much what the market does but what the companies are saying when trying to figure out what's going on with the economy.

 

[bang guy]

Originally Posted by Darthtang AW
http:///forum/post/3214229
Ok, our president and others in his administration say the economy is growing. Yet each month we have lost more and more jobs....so if the economy is growing would we not be showing job loss each month. Be honest....state the recession is slowing down, but by no means is the economy growing...to grow you have to have a business increase and there are very few companies/businesses that are showing any steady growth...they may have stabilized and leveled out...but they are NOT growing.
The economies in India and China are growing at the fastest pace ever. Perhaps that's what they mean.

 

[slf125]

Originally Posted by reefraff
http:///forum/post/3214505
The market dropped when Obama started speaking about what they are going to do to the banks. Not sure if it is really connected of not.
You don't want to watch so much what the market does but what the companies are saying when trying to figure out what's going on with the economy.
Absolutely that is probably the cause but all im saying is the election in massachusetts had no/little effect on the economy.

 

[reefraff]

Killing Obama Care might actually have an effect on the economy. If Brown ends up the 51st Republican Senator it will mean something but I doubt the market cared one way or another today.

 

[srfisher17]

Originally Posted by SLF125
http:///forum/post/3214520
Absolutely that is probably the cause but all im saying is the election in massachusetts had no/little effect on the economy.
This election may just be the start of a real change in the outlook of business. I think most businesses had hiring on hold because of all the uncertainty around health care, "green' jobs (actually, the loss of non-green" jobs), uncertain taxation policies, and the anti-business climate created by the Dems in general. When all those 'Evil" businesses feel optimistic again, they will invest in new jobs. Most decent jobs are very expensive to create and smart businesses don't hire based on a week of numbers.

 

[reefraff]

I heard that bloomburg did a survey of investment people and 69% saw Obama as anti business. That doesn't help the economy. When people expect the government to enact policies that will hurt their bottom line it doesn't provide any encouragement for expanding.

 

[oscardeuce]

Attributed to another socialist:
"If you repeat a lie long enough, it becomes truth."

 

[slf125]

Originally Posted by srfisher17
http:///forum/post/3215221
This election may just be the start of a real change in the outlook of business. I think most businesses had hiring on hold because of all the uncertainty around health care, "green' jobs (actually, the loss of non-green" jobs), uncertain taxation policies, and the anti-business climate created by the Dems in general. When all those 'Evil" businesses feel optimistic again, they will invest in new jobs. Most decent jobs are very expensive to create and smart businesses don't hire based on a week of numbers.
So did the election have am effect or not, im confused about what you guys are trying to say. If it didn't, it is what Obama said about banks that made the stock market drop, If it did, then it was the election of a republican in massachusetts that caused it.

P.s. I do agree with your statement

 

[sickboy]

Originally Posted by Darthtang AW
http:///forum/post/3214229
Ok, our president and others in his administration say the economy is growing. Yet each month we have lost more and more jobs....so if the economy is growing would we not be showing job loss each month. Be honest....state the recession is slowing down, but by no means is the economy growing...to grow you have to have a business increase and there are very few companies/businesses that are showing any steady growth...they may have stabilized and leveled out...but they are NOT growing.
Actually, it did grow, GDP for the 3rd quarter was up, not by much though. I imagine he probably has 4Q numbers that none of us have access to yet. Do jobs have to increase w/ an economic increase? No. It is the norm, but expect jobs to lag at least a couple quarters behind any substantial growth (which we have not yet had).

 

[sickboy]

Originally Posted by reefraff
http:///forum/post/3214505
The market dropped when Obama started speaking about what they are going to do to the banks. Not sure if it is really connected of not.
The bank 'tax' will actually have the reverse effect than what its 'intended' implementation is suppose to address. There would be ways to make it a tax that encourages lending, not the reverse.
But, returning to the Glass-Steagall regulation of either being an investment or commercial bank, but not both, makes sense. After all, its repeal in 1999 is what created "institutions too big to fail." If Lehman or Wamu were mixed banks they wouldn't have been allowed to fail...

 

[reefraff]

Originally Posted by sickboy
http:///forum/post/3215977
The bank 'tax' will actually have the reverse effect than what its 'intended' implementation is suppose to address. There would be ways to make it a tax that encourages lending, not the reverse.
But, returning to the Glass-Steagall regulation of either being an investment or commercial bank, but not both, makes sense. After all, its repeal in 1999 is what created "institutions too big to fail." If Lehman or Wamu were mixed banks they wouldn't have been allowed to fail...
They are talking about taxing certain transactions, I don't see that as encouraging investment.
What has really shocked me is I didn't think the Democrats could possibly be tone death to the point they would pull out the "it's not out agenda that's wrong, we just need to do a better job of explaining it" line and directly after Tuesday's election it seemed they had learned but as time goes by I'll be damned if that isn't exactly what they are doing. Gibbs and Axlerod were both doing the Sunday shows and trying to make the case the election wasn't about health care or Obama's tactics. HELLO?

 

[sickboy]

Originally Posted by reefraff
http:///forum/post/3216144
They are talking about taxing certain transactions, I don't see that as encouraging investment.
Right, what they need to do is (if they insist on taxing the banks anyway) is devise a tax that is on Net profit + executive compensation. In order to decrease the tax, the bank merely needs to open lines of credit to decrease net profit which would drive small business. Small business is what drives the country. But, the way they want to tax will actually decrease lending IMO.
Originally Posted by reefraff
http:///forum/post/3216144
What has really shocked me is I didn't think the Democrats could possibly be tone death to the point they would pull out the "it's not out agenda that's wrong, we just need to do a better job of explaining it" line and directly after Tuesday's election it seemed they had learned but as time goes by I'll be damned if that isn't exactly what they are doing. Gibbs and Axlerod were both doing the Sunday shows and trying to make the case the election wasn't about health care or Obama's tactics. HELLO?
Agreed. And some of the things they want to do they need to explain better as to what it is & why it will help. Some things truly should help, but they are seen as agenda items due to poor explanation.