We're in a Recovery

[mundame]

Jobless claims hit lowest point in five years

By Jason Lange
WASHINGTON - Factory activity grew the most in nearly two years in January and the number of new claims for jobless benefits dropped to a five-year low last week, giving surprisingly strong signals on the economy's pulse. Full Article


The S&P finally went over 1500 this morning, and the Dow is looking at 14,000, which would be an all-time high.

So I guess the recovery does have some gas now. Presumably unemployment figures will start to drop soon.

I am still worried about Europe: Britain just threatened to leave the EU, and while Cameron put his referendum five years out and hedged it around with a lot of barriers, the Europeans were so angry that it's clear they believe England leaving would break up the European Union --- and presumably the global financial system, at least for awhile.

Any other concerns? I'd say the debt limit, but that is unsolved and yet the stock market is soaring, so I guess no one is actually worried about that. They'll kick the can down the road, as usual.

[red states rule]

Jobless claims hit lowest point in five years

By Jason Lange
WASHINGTON - Factory activity grew the most in nearly two years in January and the number of new claims for jobless benefits dropped to a five-year low last week, giving surprisingly strong signals on the economy's pulse. Full Article


The S&P finally went over 1500 this morning, and the Dow is looking at 14,000, which would be an all-time high.

So I guess the recovery does have some gas now. Presumably unemployment figures will start to drop soon.

I am still worried about Europe: Britain just threatened to leave the EU, and while Cameron put his referendum five years out and hedged it around with a lot of barriers, the Europeans were so angry that it's clear they believe England leaving would break up the European Union --- and presumably the global financial system, at least for awhile.

Any other concerns? I'd say the debt limit, but that is unsolved and yet the stock market is soaring, so I guess no one is actually worried about that. They'll kick the can down the road, as usual.

Eh, gas prices are still double what they were when Obama took office. The labor participation rate is shrinking. Food prices continue to rise. Wages are still flat. Foreclosures continue to roll along. and of course Obama continues to borrow 40 cents for every dollar spent and Dems have yet to pass a budget in over 4 years. So is this what you call a recovery?

[Drummond]

Jobless claims hit lowest point in five years

By Jason Lange
WASHINGTON - Factory activity grew the most in nearly two years in January and the number of new claims for jobless benefits dropped to a five-year low last week, giving surprisingly strong signals on the economy's pulse. Full Article


The S&P finally went over 1500 this morning, and the Dow is looking at 14,000, which would be an all-time high.

So I guess the recovery does have some gas now. Presumably unemployment figures will start to drop soon.

I am still worried about Europe: Britain just threatened to leave the EU, and while Cameron put his referendum five years out and hedged it around with a lot of barriers, the Europeans were so angry that it's clear they believe England leaving would break up the European Union --- and presumably the global financial system, at least for awhile.

Any other concerns? I'd say the debt limit, but that is unsolved and yet the stock market is soaring, so I guess no one is actually worried about that. They'll kick the can down the road, as usual.

Red States' answer is an excellent one.

The debt limit should be a MASSIVE concern. Obama needs to try the approach our own Coalition Government in the UK is trying ... that of REDUCING indebtedness. This 'spend as if there's no tomorrow' mentality may be typically Socialist, but BEING typically Socialist, it's also typically ruinous. Even the mightiest of economies don't have infinite resources.

But anyway, it's your comment on Britain within the EU I chiefly wanted to comment about.

I think that you're considerably overstating your argument.

I don't doubt that much of Europe is angry with the UK. But .. what if they are ? Sure, they want us on board as a compliant 'partner' .. but with the terms they want to tie us into, that 'partnership' involves a terminal loss of our sovereignty. What sort of 'partner' offers an arrangement which, in reality, amounts to dictatorship from unelected officials, from a bureaucratic body demanding power over you, at an ever increasing rate .. and expects to be paid for the privilege !!!

The UK, if it left the EU, would do little more than annoy Brussels for having done so. There are plenty of other Member States tied into Europe, and there are even membership applications pending. The EU would most certainly survive if we left it. YES, it might give other Member States food for thought. There might be a ripple-back effect as some trading agreements suffered. But it'd be eminently survivable from the EU's point of view.

Consider that we refused to tie £ sterling into the Euro. Did the Euro collapse because of it ... OR, is its viability in long-term decline because weaker currencies of OTHER nations have dragged it down ?

Fact is, Mundame, that European unity is all about power-robbing, in order to create a European SuperState, this in turn being a step to making globalism a more complete reality. What WAS the EEC, a trading partnership, has today become a Leftie control-freaking paradise.

Let the bureaucrats throw a tantrum if the UK leaves. They'll survive it, and get over it. As will we, in the UK. And as a politically FREE entity.

See ... http://www.express.co.uk/ourcomments.../Leo-McKinstry

THE European Union has always been an enemy of democracy. It is a bureaucratic empire that governs with neither legitimacy nor consent. <section class="text-description" itxtnodeid="211" itxtharvested="0">
As Brussels continues its drive towards the creation of a federal superstate, the will of the British people is treated with the same contempt as our national sovereignty.

But at last a British leader has had the guts to challenge the EU’s remorseless destruction of our independence.

In his ground-breaking speech yesterday David Cameron declared that if the Tories win the general election in 2015 he will fight to repatriate powers back to Britain from Brussels.

Such a step would mark a dramatic reversal of the process that has been under way since we joined the Common Market 40 years ago, whereby the Eurocrats have been allowed to establish ever more oppressive control over our country.

Even more importantly Cameron promised that this new settlement will be put to the public in a straightforward in/out referendum before the end of 2017. “It is time for the British people to have their say,” he concluded.

With this speech Cameron has transformed British politics.

He has strengthened his party, exposed the hollowness of the Opposition and sent an electric shock through the EU. Given all the hype before Cameron’s performance it seemed likely that he would fail to live up to expectations. But he far exceeded them, not just through the powerful Euroscepticism of his language but also through his concrete proposal for an in/out referendum. Of course there are many hurdles to overcome.

For a start everything is dependent on the Conservatives winning the next election. Moreover the EU, whose entire existence is built on “ever closer union”, is unlikely to be amenable to British demands for more national autonomy.

Many in Brussels have reacted with alarm to Cameron’s speech, regarding it as an affront to their cherished federal project. Typically, Belgian Guy Verhofstadt, one of the most passionate integrationists in the European Parliament, claimed Cameron was “playing with fire”.

This reaction illustrates the instinctive disdain for democracy within the EU. But Brussels should not be too dismissive of Cameron. For his referendum proposal has strengthened his position in any future negotiations.

The reality that the British people might vote to leave, taking away our annual £18billion contribution from EU coffers, will make our partners far more wary of riding roughshod over our wishes.

Already German Chancellor Angela Merkel is talking of “compromise” with Britain, an indicator of the EU’s nervousness about our potential exit.

Only two years ago Cameron said he saw “no need for an in/out” referendum. He has been forced to change his stance because of the public’s growing hostility towards the EU. This newspaper deserves a lot of credit for helping strengthen that scepticism. When we began our campaign for a British withdrawal from the EU we were mocked.

Europhiles with their mix of smugness and snobbery derided us for extremism, portraying the paper as a lone voice crying in the wilderness.

How wrong they were. In our demand for democratic self-governance, the Daily Express is now firmly in the mainstream of public opinion. It is the Euro fanatics who now lie on the extremes, their project broken by the eurozone debt crisis and the social dislocation arising from uncontrolled immigration.

</section>A brilliant article.

Obama, as he's recently made clear, would hate us to leave the EU. He's had the arrogance to expect us to TAKE being ruled from outside our national borders.

But then .. he is a Leftie, who doesn't care a jot about the ordinary citizen's wishes. Or - when it defies what he wants - the sanctity of democratic process itself !

[jimnyc]

I'm not an economist, so I won't claim superiority here. I think IF we are in any type of recovery, the speed is the slowest ever known to man. I really don't see much of a national change on key indicators to fully support that yet, and for a measurable amount of time.

[Drummond]

I'm not an economist, so I won't claim superiority here. I think IF we are in any type of recovery, the speed is the slowest ever known to man. I really don't see much of a national change on key indicators to fully support that yet, and for a measurable amount of time.

I don't think you're in a recovery at all. You cannot recover for as long as public spending continues as it is. It's perfectly simple .. Obama needs to operate an economic strategy grounded in realism, instead of recklessness. Encouraging 'blips' along the way are fools' gold.

[red states rule]

More news on the Obama "recovery"

The Worst Economic Recovery Ever

January 24, 2013
By Lonely Conservative
Did you hear the news this morning that initial jobless claims have hit a new low? Well, that’s because they estimated the numbers from three big states. What a convenient distraction from the real news.

If there was any debate whether the Fed’s policies have helped the economy or just the market (and specifically the Bernanke-targeted Russell 2000), the following two charts will end any and all debate. As the following chart from the St Louis Fed shows, as of the just completed quarter, US GDP “growth” since the “recovery” is now the worst in US history, having just dipped below the heretofore lowest on record.

Here’s the chart.

The only people experiencing a nice recovery are the 1% the Democrats love to bash in public. Funny, huh?
Read the whole thing.

http://lonelyconservative.com/2013/0...recovery-ever/

[mundame]

I'm not an economist, so I won't claim superiority here. I think IF we are in any type of recovery, the speed is the slowest ever known to man. I really don't see much of a national change on key indicators to fully support that yet, and for a measurable amount of time.

Oh, it's been slow, for sure. Historically slow: we really got into serious, serious trouble in 2007-2008.

Well, you could be right. I am partly going by the stock market, which is very high, but January is almost always one of the best months of the year for the stock market, so maybe I shouldn't.

I could be premature here. Let's watch and see.

[jimnyc]

Oh, it's been slow, for sure. Historically slow: we really got into serious, serious trouble in 2007-2008.

Well, you could be right. I am partly going by the stock market, which is very high, but January is almost always one of the best months of the year for the stock market, so maybe I shouldn't.

I could be premature here. Let's watch and see.

I'm still of the belief that "true" recovery won't begin until the government reels in wasteful spending and lowers taxes. Taking more and more money from citizens won't spur growth, it just gives the government more money to waste.

[mundame]

Red States' answer is an excellent one.

You made me look -----

Just more of the usual snark and sneer from RSR. And spam.

RSR is a snarkaholic and I keep him firmly turned off. Snarkaholics will destroy anyone they can, with a constant stream of sneer and jeer.

[aboutime]

The Only RECOVERY taking place. Is by Those Americans who voted for Obama a second time, and ONLY NOW are trying to RECOVER from their repeated BUYERS REMORSE.

Recovery for the Economy can not, and will not happen until 2016 when either Obama is gone, or the European Style Socialist Government takes over, and all of us are BANKRUPT.

[mundame]

I don't think you're in a recovery at all. You cannot recover for as long as public spending continues as it is. It's perfectly simple .. Obama needs to operate an economic strategy grounded in realism, instead of recklessness. Encouraging 'blips' along the way are fools' gold.

I want to respond to your very interesting longer post, but this one is worrying me ------ not that you are saying it but that it might be true.

I think you are saying that an apparent recovery could be "fools' gold" if it all crashes in a heap because of a Spain/Greek-style deficit crisis.

Well, there is that.......

[Kathianne]

I'm not an economist, so I won't claim superiority here. I think IF we are in any type of recovery, the speed is the slowest ever known to man. I really don't see much of a national change on key indicators to fully support that yet, and for a measurable amount of time.

I'm not an economist either, but I do know that when the Constitution for the EU is longer than the Obama Health Care 'affordability' option, the European countries have a problem. From the get go it appeared to strip away autonomy of the states. Seems that even in France, when it appeared they were thinking of a direct vote on something or other, it quickly became clear the people were against, so the French government 'decided' to go along with EU, rather than vote. Interesting that.

[mundame]

Yes, I agree with you, Drummond, the article you posted is brilliant. I particularly liked the analysis that Cameron's announcement of an upcoming referendum, however distant! strengthens his hand at negotiations with Brussels.

I don't know if you are aware that I agree generally with you: certainly the EU is an elitist, non-democratic exercise: if they took a vote, many countries would vote themselves out immediately, including Germany!

But anyway, it's your comment on Britain within the EU I chiefly wanted to comment about.

I think that you're considerably overstating your argument.

I THINK I mainly argued that Europe is showing very interesting signs of being terrified by this threat of referendum by Cameron. And the article you cited seems to agree that they are quite worried. Contagion, contagion --- the bête noir of this very fragile union these days. I cannot tell how much trouble Europe is in; of course they hide it, they have to or their fear becomes self-fulfilling. So I am interested at the anger; they may well feel Cameron is trying to break it up.</SPAN>
Well, that would be a fall-back position Britain has never shied away from before in two millennia.....a spoke in the wheel of European powers. Hey, works for me.

I gather you do NOT entirely agree with either me or the article you cited, that the united Europe project is in real danger because of Cameron's strong speech. You think they'll get up and walk it off.

The article says, however, It is the Euro fanatics who now lie on the extremes, their project broken by the eurozone debt crisis and the social dislocation arising from uncontrolled immigration.

Their project broken........

We talked before about Obama's strange strong reproof of Britain and Cameron a couple weeks earlier. He of course must have been given an advance copy of the speech. So our State Department/administration also thinks Cameron's referendum or even just the threat of it could break up the EU, and thinks that would be bad for the United States.

Probably would, in the sense of European wars becoming more likely again, avoiding which has long been our interest and concern.

However, it's not working. IMO, Europe will break up. I could be very wrong, of course. But I watch this sort of clue with interest.

[Kathianne]

Some recovery:

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2013-0...onomy-30-years

Gallup Poll: Americans Most Negative On the Nation And Economy In 30 Years


Submitted by Tyler Durden on 01/24/2013 15:03 -0500

Via Michael Krieger of Liberty Blitzkrieg blog,
I guess Americans just haven’t heard of a little something called the stock market. Isn’t that right Bernanke? Wasn’t the stock market rally you engineered supposed to make everyone feel all nice and confident? Well the great middle class squeeze continues, as the stock market is for the 1% what food stamps are for the poor. They are just strategies to keep these groups apathetic and obedient. The middle class isn’t buying it though, as is evidenced by this recent Gallup Poll conducted January 7-10, 2013.


From Gallup:

PRINCETON, NJ — U.S. President Barack Obama begins his second term at a time when Americans are as negative about the state of the country and its prospects going forward as they have been in more than three decades. Fewer than four in 10 Americans (39%) rate the current status of the U.S. at the positive end of a zero to 10 scale. This is about the same as in 2010, but it is fewer than have said so at any point since 1979. As they usually are, Americans are more upbeat in their predictions of where the U.S. will be in five years (48% positive), but this is also lower than at any time since 1979.

The 39% of Americans who give a six to 10 rating when asked to evaluate the nation’s current status is similar to the 37% who said the same three years ago. Prior to that, however, assessments were generally more positive, including a 73% six to 10 rating in January 2001 — the highest on record. The three previous points in time when ratings were as low as or lower than the 2013 rating were in August 1979 (34%), April 1974 (33%), and January 1971 (39%). The 1979 measure came at a time when the economy was in bad shape and inflation was rampant, while the 1974 measure came in the midst of the Watergate scandal. When Gallup first asked the question in August 1959, 68% of Americans rated the state of the nation in the six to 10 range.

What about the future?

The 48% who give a six to 10 ranking when asked to project the status of the U.S. five years from now is tied with the 1979 measure as the lowest in Gallup’s history of asking the question. Additionally, the 40% who give a negative rating (zero to four) when asked to look ahead is lower than at any point in history. These negative ratings include 10% who say the situation of the country in five years will be zero, the worst they can imagine.

Not so much. Don’t worry Bernanke, I’m sure another 50 S&P handles will make everything better.


Full Gallup article here.

[Robert A Whit]

Eh, gas prices are still double what they were when Obama took office. The labor participation rate is shrinking. Food prices continue to rise. Wages are still flat. Foreclosures continue to roll along. and of course Obama continues to borrow 40 cents for every dollar spent and Dems have yet to pass a budget in over 4 years. So is this what you call a recovery?

Since Obama took over, food prices are staggering. And she forgot to mention those so discouraged that though they got laid off long ago, they no longer get counted by Obama.

Actual estimates of the unemployeed must still be in the 15/16 percent range or higher.

She has been told before that if you are rich, you ought to love Obama since his polices help the rich the most.