WorldTraveller

*Jobs added over 160,000 K, beating estimates *Unemployment rate ticks up to 8.3% *150,000 Left the workforce *household survey showed that the actual amount of Americans working dropped by 195,000, with the net job gain resulting primarily *from seasonal adjustments in the establishment survey. *U-6 "Real Unemployment rate" rose from 14.9% to 15% *Average work week held steady at 34.5 hours while average hourly earnings rose 2 cents to $23.52. Headline Jobs number beats estimates, from what I've read a lot of that has to do with seasonal adjustments, however total jobs went down when you factor in the household survey (which is included in the factoring of the unemployment rate), with a headline jobs number of above 150k you would believe that if the unemployment rate rose it would be because more people entered into the workforce, however that wasn't the case here. Over 150k dropped out of the labor force, the reason why the unemployment rate rose is because more people lost jobs than gained through the household survey. In regards to wages, they remained stagnant.

Without a doubt a rising stock market is good for any incumbent president, because there is a wealth effect. However, the amount of people participating in the stock market are nearly at all time lows as volumes have virtually vanished, which suggests that the majority of the money in these markets comes from Professional traders, and that a rising stock market isn't as significant for the electorate as it use to be. But lets not kid ourselves, it is a net positive for the president. Having said that, the stock market is up mainly because of two reasons, one is the federal reserves easy money policies that are helping now, fueled by ultra low interest rates (which I happen to believe at the end of the day it will end up being a net negative) and two, corporations are doing well because a) they cut costs down dramatically and have become more efficient b) most sales growth is/was being driven by overseas growth.

"maggot" huh? Just shows the level of hate that you harbor. You are a sad sad little man. Do you really expect to get through to Eric? After all, he has outed himself as an intolerant bigot.

No! Shut up and take your !@#$ing medicine.

Says the hypocrite who called demarco a "douche" for seeing things differently than you

No, I won't go with obamas plan because it's wrong. And I will encourage my representative to block pretty much everything Obama does because he's incapable of crafting sound economic policy

Who cares what you think?

No, what's ludicrous is the idea that you can artificially place a bottom.

Why would I get offended? Youre just some dude over the Internet that has a differing view than I do.

Well, I think that it's unfortunate that many people hold this view, that any time we face a structural issue that the only solution that is offered is a bailout. And if we don't bail people or companies or countries or what have you, that somehow, people are getting shafted. I just think that this sort of dependency eventually leads us to one place and that is insolvency. I live in Miami Florida, recently had 2 condos that we're foreclosed on. I never complained or bitched about not getting a principal reduction and certainly never played the roll of the victim crying aloud " I got shafted" There is a noble concept called personal accountability. Wish that there were more people who valued such ideals. The economy would be healing faster if we didn't have these robin hood policies

I'm asking who is getting shafted! And how? Its a simple question No, the point is that demarco stated that he didn't believe that it would significantly reduce foreclosures and that he didn't believe that it wouldn't be a good deal for the tax payer. Key word "and" He also specifically eluded to the issue of moral hazard

Of course you do, you support interventionist policies, which have a long history of failures. So how are we getting the shaft? By not getting bailed out for the decisions we made? Could you expand on this thought specifically on who is getting shafted and how?

Who's "getting the shaft"?

I would suggest that you not take lessons from the opinion pages And a lot of people disagree. So there we have it

Where have you been? Or do you just selectively hear what you want to hear? It's been discussed ad nauseum. Also how on earth do you know that he didn't consider the "external benefits"? I will tell you, you don't. You pulled it out of your ass or read a krugman article and came to this baseless conclusion. You're just making stuff up

Yes, but that doesn't mean its good policy.

http://www.nationalreview.com/campaign-spot/313024/when-government-plays-part-it-can-bring-private-sector-along The House Energy and Commerce Committee released some White House and other e-mails relating to Solyndra. Unsurprisingly, there were many, many warnings that this was a quite risky method of using taxpayer dollars, and it appears those warnings were ignored: White House Aide Aditya Kumar in an e-mail to deputy White House communications director Dan Pfeiffer and other White House staffers: “Dan: Some background. This is a Recovery Act Grant. Details: Will be first DoE Loan Guarantee since 1980s (since the geothermal grants in the 80s, I believe). Total amount will be $535M (with a $107M govt subsidy). This is a solar panel manufacturing company in Fremont, CA. Story is two things: JOBS: Solyndra estimates this will create thousands of jobs (over 3,000K was on estimate I saw but not sure how dated that was); When Government Plays a Part, It can Bring the Private Sector Along: Solyndra has secured over large amounts in private capital which is a story in itself.” Of course, all of the Solyndra jobs are gone, and perhaps this is a good example of government playing a part it shouldn’t. Venture capitalist Steve Mitchell in an e-mail to George Kaiser, an Obama donor and Solyndra investor: “Solyndra selected [Goldman Sachs] as the “banker on the left” for its S1 filing which will occur tmrw. Morgan Stanley is co-leading the IPO. The politics and pressure around this selection was nothing short of ridiculous at some level.” E-mail from Solyndra investor Brad Jones to top Obama economic adviser Larry Summers: “One of our solar companies with revenues of less than $100 million (and not yet profitable) received a government loan of $580 million; while that is good for us, I can’t imagine it’s a good way for the government to use taxpayer money (I’d prefer my opinion about that specific company to be between us). Every administration seems to feel it knows better than the private markets how to allocate capital, and I’ve just never seen that be true.” UPDATE: Wait, there’s more! Aditya Kumar to Jacob Levine of the Office of Energy and Climate Change: “feels like Rahm wants this too (barring any concerns) — POTUS involvement was Rahm’s idea.” A May 8, 2010 memo from an unidentified figure in Solyndra to George Kaiser Family Foundation Executive Director Ken Levit (George Kaiser was one of Solyndra’s largest investors): The past five months have witnessed a tremendous competitive headwind for the company coupled with some severe management mistakes. Cutting to the chase – we will not be going public during 2010 and our longer term business plan looks to be somewhat in jeopardy….” “I think there is still a plan here to getting a solid return out of Solyndra for ourselves (and our friends and family shares alongside us) but we have pushed out any significant positive event until 2011 and perhaps 2012. Three weeks after this memo reveals there will be no public offering, that the long-term business plan is in jeopardy, and there is a plan to get a “solid return for ourselves”… Obama spoke at Solyndra: It was during this event that President Obama declared, “companies like Solyndra are leading the way toward a brighter and more prosperous future.”

"right wing Miami-dade authorities"

Well yes.... And it is, even though we all know it's been happening for quite some time.

Jesus

http://miamiherald.typepad.com/nakedpolitics/2012/08/miami-dade-voter-fraud-case-widens.html Of the 31 absentee ballots that have become the focus of an investigation into possible election fraud in Hialeah, at least one appears to have a forged signature. The ballot belonged to Zulema Gómez, 81, who entered a nursing home five months ago suffering from Alzheimer’s and a brain tumor. On the ballot’s envelope someone wrote: “The lady is my sister. I sign like this because she has arthritis + she has difficult signing. Thank you.”

Sure sure, you keep telling yourself that

What's funny is that I just went over to WAPO's site, and it's nowhere to be found on their main page. (And if it is, it's hidden) However, they do have a nice article on Rafalca, Ann Romney's horse.

It's worse. - White House chief of staff Jack Lew may have disregarded warnings from lower-level budget employees that the administration's efforts to prop up Solyndra were unwise and possibly illegal, The Washington Post is reporting based on an upcoming House Energy and Commerce Committee report. The Post's story says the report "suggests" that Lew — in his previous role as director of the Office of Management and Budget — "let the refinancing move forward without intervening, even though some OMB analysts thought a refinancing plan that favored private investors might violate the law." It quotes from January 2011 emails by OMB analyst Kelly Colyar suggesting that taxpayers would lose only $141 million if the company were immediately liquidated, as opposed to $385 million if the government restructured the loan agreement and released more money to Solyndra. Instead, the Energy Department approved a restructuring in which private investors agreed to put more money into the company in return for getting first crack at repayment — ahead of taxpayers — if the company went under. Now, under a proposed Chapter 11 bankruptcy reorganization, Solyndra may end up repaying only $24 million of its $527 million government-backed loan, according to some analysts. Colyar called herself "vastly confused by DOE's decision to negotiate away their senior position in this transaction," according to emails quoted by the Post. She also wrote that proceeds of an immediate sale of the company would be "significantly HIGHER than DOE's estimate," adding that the government "is better off liquidating the assets today than restructuring under DOE's proposal," the Post reported. - Read more: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0812/79313.html#ixzz22PBk0psb You have blatant disregard of taxpayer money from Obama's right hand man, despite all the warnings, he allegedly disregarded them in order to attempt to fulfill this administrations ideological goals. Scandalous Again, who do you want managing this country, Obama or Romney?