I don’t see it quite the same way...
5% unemployment doesn’t mean everyone who wants to work has a job. Some economists call it full employment because that seems to be the best that a capitalistic country can achieve. Also they are probably referring to real unemployment, not official unemployment. The official US figure only counts people drawing unemployment insurance. Of course, the government determines who is eligible for unemployment insurance. So the government is saying “unemployment is what we decide is”.
Left out of the equation are people who are re-entering the workforce after a long absence, students looking for work, discouraged workers who have given up looking, people who have quit their jobs or were fired for whatever reason, among others. So the real number is always higher and in bad times, it could be alot higher.
Every economic indicator there is shows us in a deep recession and possibly going into a depression. The most obvious is of course the stock market. It would be interesting to go back and search for old newspapers from 1929/1930 and look for the word depression. I wonder how long it took people back then to realize they were in one.
We could debate about the why, and who is responsible, but if you think this recession is just a MSM concoction, your living in a bubble.
Ok, let’s take this from the top. What event(s) led to the current financial and lending industry problems? That is a logical starting point—is it not?
The seminal event occured about 1998—during the Clintoon administration. It is a matter of public record that a policy decision was made by his administration to the effect that every American had a right to “own” a home. Under the Clintoon’s direction the demrat CEOs of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac required mortgage lenders to raise the number of subprime loans from 20% to 50%—under penalty of prosecution for not doing so. Now, most of us know a subprime borrower is one who has no or insufficient income to pay back the loan within the time parameters of the loan—15, 30 or whatever number of years. Oh, and subprime “buyers” most likely will have a poor (I use the term loosly) credit history.
Upshot: The house of cards collapses on itself about 3 months into the presidential campaign. Now that’s convenient, isn’t it? But don’t misunderstand me, I think Bush II and RINOs were up to their ears in this as well.
Result: Banks stop lending. Banks can’t get anybody to assume risk for subprime loans. Oh and AIG, who had a responsibility to oversee the quality of the loans decided it would just go with the flow. Did I mention that 95% of financial and lending house CEOs—including AIG—were and are demrats. The other 5%, despite their political affiliation, contribute heavily to Demrat—including Onada—campaign coffers.
I’m sorry Kamikaze, if it walks like a duck and talks like a duck it’s a duck. This whole economic crisis was managed—and continues to be managed—by The Marxist Onada and his crowd.
Do you really believe there is no reason the government has not allowed the Stock Market to correct itself? It always has in the past when the government does not interfer. And please, spare me FDR’s New Deal nonesense. What saved him was WWII. Up to that event, his interference was slowing down the recovery not helping the economy recover. The problem with government jobs is that they produce no new wealth. In fact, they syphon off wealth. By definition they are “make work”.
Do you really think an avowed Marxist wants a healthy stock market—let alone any stock market at all?
Concurrent with these shannanigans, bad labor contracts come to roost for the three Detroit auto makers. Chrysler, of course, is bellying up to the bar for the second time.
The demrats, demrat CEOs, leftists like Soros and Buffet and RINOs are all complicit in creating the perfect ecomonic storm.