Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Anyone Remember 10% Unenployment in Carter Years?
Greenville News | self

Posted on 09/08/2001 9:51:30 AM PDT by Moby Grape

Today's Greenville News (South Carolina) headline screams "BRUTAL Unemployment News". EXCUSE ME!!!! I do not recall this liberal rag using the term "brutal" to describe the 10% unemployment rate under Jimmy Carter (the TRUE worst ecomony in 50 years). I do not suggest that I am not bothered by the unemployment trend, but I am reminding all that there was a time in this country, not too long ago, when economists said it was not possible to get below 6%. There were MANY years under the democrat controlled Congresses that 7-8% was the norm.


TOPICS: News/Current Events
KEYWORDS:
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 101-103 next last
But, what should I expect from the national liberal media?
1 posted on 09/08/2001 9:51:30 AM PDT by Moby Grape
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Impeach the Boy
Actually, Greenspan for many years insisted that 6-7% was not just normal, but desirable, and that the economy would suffer with lower unemployment. Has that man ever been right about anything?
2 posted on 09/08/2001 9:59:09 AM PDT by ignatz_q
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ignatz_q
Good point. And did the press remind everyone of what "Moses" said?...NO...The point, of course, is that the media is acting like 4.9% is the end of the world, when only a few years ago they sang the "anythong below 6% would be bad for the country" tune that Greespan laid on us.
3 posted on 09/08/2001 10:02:48 AM PDT by Moby Grape
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Impeach the Boy
The correct spelling is "Greenspin".
4 posted on 09/08/2001 10:07:52 AM PDT by BrucefromMtVernon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

Comment #5 Removed by Moderator

To: Impeach the Boy
It was higher than this during all of Slick's first term. Did anyone ever mention the word "recession" after Jan. '93?
6 posted on 09/08/2001 10:08:16 AM PDT by Senator Pardek
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ignatz_q
Yes, was right about the dollar back in 1985 when he made a pile going long Yen futures after the Plaza Accord.Greenspan has been targeting unemployment as his monetary guide, which has been a failure for all to see, and because of this, has created a monetary deflation.

Oh, and I remember the Carter years, with endless talk of reduced circumstances, oil running out, and the sharpest minds all agreeing there was no way out of the malaise.There was, it was called The Reagan.

7 posted on 09/08/2001 10:09:35 AM PDT by habs4ever
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Impeach the Boy
I hate to defend Carter (you have no idea how much), but they changed the way it's measured during Reagan's term. They started to include the military in the equation. As a result, unemployment statistics are not exactly equal for comparison.

That doesn't equate for the full 10% by any means, but the same level of unemplyment wouldn't be 10% today. I would figure it's at least worth 1%.

8 posted on 09/08/2001 10:12:24 AM PDT by sharktrager
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Carol-HuTex
W is getting bad advice from Larry Lindsay, who has to be canned tout suite.W also has until November to get on board, or he'll run out of time to help the Congress for '02.
9 posted on 09/08/2001 10:12:31 AM PDT by habs4ever
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Impeach the Boy
And let us not forget the misery index.

Unemployemnt + Inflation......

10 posted on 09/08/2001 10:18:00 AM PDT by El Sordo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Impeach the Boy

Global Smackdown Continues Asia was pasted again last night with Hong Kong falling 3 percent to another new low, while Japan managed to only drop a percent and end just shy of a new low. Europe was down about 3 percent this morning with all major indexes hitting new lows for the move once again. The US futures were higher ahead of the unemployment number but then tanked on the news that the August unemployment rate had risen to 4.9 percent, a 4-year high and the biggest monthly increase in 6 years. As usual, the number doesn't really matter (it's a lagging indicator.) It's the reaction that counts, and that reaction was negative. That set up a gap down at the open that was followed by a sharp rally, as shorts got a little edgy and decided to cover a bit. From there we had a steady grind lower into the afternoon that took us to new lows for the day in the S&Ps, while the NASDAQ actually held up around unchanged. At that point rumors started going around that Bush was going to announce a "capital gains cut" (just plug in your favorite economy "savior" here.) That began a sharp rally that retraced about half the day's losses. Bush then began speaking in the last hour. Unfortunately, he had no "magic bullet" to save the day (and he won't have one.) Bush simply said, "I want the American people to know we're deeply concerned about the unemployment rates, and we intend to do something about it.'' More tax cuts aren't going to do anything other than increase the deficit and push up interest rates, which will just add another problem to the growing long list. It's the ultimate no-win scenario. It's not Bush's fault. This cake was baked long before he came into office by the Clinton Treasury and the Greenspan Fed that aided and abetted this mania instead of stopping it back in 1996 when it began getting out of hand. I actually feel sorry for the Bush because he's probably going to get some of the blame for this mess and doesn't deserve it.

From the PrudentBear.com 09/07/01.

11 posted on 09/08/2001 10:22:15 AM PDT by Stentor
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Impeach the Boy
Oh yeah, I remember "stagflation". That's why I could only shake my head in disbelief when Klintoon was lying his *ss off about the economy in '92. I consider the economy back in '79 to be a recession. We've only had slowdowns for the past 20 years, not recessions.
12 posted on 09/08/2001 10:23:21 AM PDT by Brett66
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Impeach the Boy
bump !!
13 posted on 09/08/2001 10:29:57 AM PDT by ChadGore
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Impeach the Boy
But, what should I expect from the national liberal media?

The irony here is, when you get unemployment rates below ten percent, the spin counts more than the reality.

Consider: at 4% unemployment, 96 out of 100 people have a job and are doing well. At 5% unemployment, 95 out of 100 people have a job and are doing well.

Thus, when the unemployment rate goes from 4 to 5% as it has recently, 95 out of 100 people don't notice the difference and are doing quite well, thank-you. Indeed 99 out of 100 people notice no change in their status. They have to rely on the media to be informed about the 'crisis' befalling the US economy.

And the media is there to scare them with hysteria about how everyone will lose their jobs -- and then, presumably, we'll all just sit around twiddling our thumbs, starving to death . . . because of overproduction.

And then we'll need a mental giant like Bill Clinton (IQ 182, according to the 'Lovenstein Institute' [barf!]) to rescue us from our helpless stupidity.

What we need to do is stop worrying that every one percent fluctuation in the unemployment level is a return to the Great Depression. The reason we had the Great Depression in the first place, economists now recognize, is because the Federal Reserve overreacted to nonexistent inflationary pressures during the 1920s. And overreaction is still a trait that we have yet to unlearn.

14 posted on 09/08/2001 10:30:27 AM PDT by 537 Votes
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Impeach the Boy
The liberal mentality believe that tax cuts cause higher unemployment, swelling deficits, unhappiness and suffering because of "unmet needs", and mushrooming national debt. Liberals point to the Reagan Tax cuts and scream: "what about the deficits"?

George Gilder correctly points out that tax cuts always increase revenues, not just government revenues but revenues across the whole economy, thus increasing the value of almost all economic assets. While the government debt increased Reagan, total national assets increased by $7 trillion more. All the real estate, stocks, bonds, and all other financial assets increased in value massively, during the Reagan years, and largely because of the tax cuts, according to Gilder. The proper measure for the relative size of the national debt is not GDP, but the value of the total assets that are the collateral for the debt, the sum total of the national wealth of the US.

Don't believe the liberal lies. Don't be conned by the deficit, national debt canard.

15 posted on 09/08/2001 10:30:46 AM PDT by AdvisorB
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #16 Removed by Moderator

Comment #17 Removed by Moderator

To: Mr.Smorch
You got that right.A simple balance sheet calculation would have to include the asset side, yet even right wingers who rail against National Debt always fail to make that observation.Debt only matter if it can't be serviced by the growing asset base, so if the assets don't grow, then you've a problem.Green eyeshade Republicans ought to think about that next time they mouth off about balanced budgets, taxes and growth.
18 posted on 09/08/2001 10:38:15 AM PDT by habs4ever
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Carol-HuTex
I hope GW is right abut a recovery...but I don't know...Commonsense should tell us that the economy could not grow at the rate it grew over the last 8 years, and some slowing had to occur....but, I am concerned....I am not saying that 4.9% unemployment doesn't bother me (I am worried about the TREND in the rate), but I am saying that the MEDIA label 4.9% as "brutal" under GW and do NOT use such words to describe the 10% under Carter.
19 posted on 09/08/2001 10:44:36 AM PDT by Moby Grape
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Impeach the Boy
I think we should contact media and remind them of the Carter years. I also think we should contact our congressmen and ask them if they are going to do what is good for their party or what is good for the country. The dems would rather see the country got to hell trying to make a political issue out of everything than do what is right.Some pubbies also. We need to let them know the american people are paying attention.
20 posted on 09/08/2001 10:45:42 AM PDT by dalebert
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 101-103 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson