New Jobless Claims Down, Wholesale Prices Up

[LordMagnusKain]

Originally posted by: dirtboy

Originally posted by: LordMagnusKain
but we should always compare this with income as compared to inflation.

What's with the sudden talk of inflation? Inflation has been near zero. Is this another scare tactic or are you just simply stating that if inflation rises, incomes need to rise with it?

That it's good for the economy to have pay raise at the rate of inflation, and good for people trying to save money to have low inflation;

and we should all worry about inflation as we've got political demands for over-employment of the population, combined with incredibly low interest rates, and exorbitant federal deficits.

low un-employment, under 6% being historically low.
low interest rates, increasing the amount of money and speed of money in the economy.
poor fiscal discipline by the government, so we have even more money added to the economy.

with so many dollars in the economy the amount a dollar will buy will have to fall if we don't get much higher production at a much lower cost... of course the producer price index was through the roof recently, which is even more dangerous as it indicates increases in prices must follow.

 

[dirtboy]

Originally posted by: LordMagnusKain

and we should all worry about inflation as we've got political demands for over-employment of the population, combined with incredibly low interest rates, and exorbitant federal deficits.

I think Greenspan has been doing an excellent job of keeping inflation in check.

low un-employment, under 6% being historically low.

So you're saying our 5.6% rate isn't as dire as Dave & Co claim. :shocked;

low interest rates, increasing the amount of money and speed of money in the economy.
poor fiscal discipline by the government, so we have even more money added to the economy.

with so many dollars in the economy the amount a dollar will buy will have to fall if we don't get much higher production at a much lower cost... of course the producer price index was through the roof recently, which is even more dangerous as it indicates increases in prices must follow.

That remains to be seen. So far so good. As you stated there is a balance, but here again, I believe Greenspan is on the money. We'll see how he continues to perform.

 

[dmcowen674]

Originally posted by: digitalsm

Originally posted by: LordMagnusKain

Originally posted by: Gonad the Barbarian
Isn't there a limit on unemployment benefits? Might this just be a result of people who's eligibility for benefits have run out are not re-applying?

discouraged worker effect, it's called; and yes; if any thing that's a bad sign for the economy as the job-pool is smaller.

I guess you are more of an expert than several economists at University of Michigan.

Have any of these Idiot Economist's and Universities been right the past 3 years? No.

Just because you buy a Bridge from them doesn't mean the rest of the Country has to.

 

[dmcowen674]

Originally posted by: heartsurgeon

time to get the Depression Thread warmed up again

HAHAHAHAHAHA
you make me laugh harder than almost anyone else.

I don't care about you laughing at me. Do you also laugh at the Millions of Americans that have lost their jobs and many of them that may need your services and can no longer afford them??? :|

 

[dmcowen674]

Originally posted by: dirtboy

Originally posted by: digitalsm

The left wants people to believe things that were credible when democrats used them, are now longer credible.

Its like saying the way of measuring unemployment is no longer vaild, even though it was the same way the measured for well a long ass time. Including in 1998 when 1.8million were laid off, and we were IIRC under 5% unemployment still.

Or historically well respected orgs that produce reports, are no longer credible either. Even though its what the buisness world has used for decades, and continues to use as a basis for projections, etc.

It seems if a republican uses something, its not longer credible. I mean Kerry used the economist Bush & Co used to run Kerry's numbers, but somehow that economist isnt credible anymore, but still credible for what Kerry and other democrats used him for.

My whole problem with this BS of the liberal left is how elitest they are. They think people should reach a certain standard and only go up. If I lost my job and I couldn't find another, I'd do anything to take care of myself and my family and only once I exausted those means, would I turn to the government for help.

In the last two weeks there were more than 200 jobs available. In this area we regularly have an unemployment rate of 10%, but apparently many of those 10% don't want to work, because if that was the case, the want ads would be nearly empty all the time. The fact of the matter is, people are lazy and they think they are better than what they actually may be. They need to stop crying and relying on the government, get a job and get back to where they were. But if you ask Dave & Co, all these people are dying in the streets.

Like I've said over and over, if you are out of work for 6 months+, you much be pretty damn rich to keep on living. I know very few people that can continue on without an income. So life must not be too bad for all those "unemployed" people who are so desperate for work. As long as there are jobs available, no matter how demeaning, I won't feel sorry for the one of them.

"is how elitest they are"

Talk about the Kettle calling the Pot Black.

 

[dmcowen674]

Originally posted by: dirtboy

Originally posted by: LordMagnusKain

Social safety net, that or the spouse may well have a job, or if unmarried may have moved back in with parents.

As far as I'm concerned, that's called life. Many people outspend their means and choose not to save for a rainy day. If they can't find another 60k job because they were overpaid during the tech boom, then that's their problem. Time to adjust to reality.

When I got divorced I had to move back in with my parents for awhile. You didn't see me complaining or blaming the President. I dusted myself off, got another jobs, worked my butt off and arrived at where I'm at today. Not a big deal to me.

Well well well, the truth finally comes out.

Having to go DOWN in salary in a major way yet you and CAD & Co keep insisting wages are going up. Hmmmm

Having to move back with parents yet still claiming the Economy is "Booming" out of the other cheek. Hmmmmm

The Hypocracy is beyond any reasonable comprehension

 

[Spencer278]

Originally posted by: charrison

Originally posted by: LordMagnusKain

Originally posted by: TheGameIs21
New Jobless Claims Down, Wholesale Prices Up

Spin this dems....

The Labor Department reported Thursday that the number of laid-off workers seeking jobless benefits fell by 6,000 last week to 336,000, a level that was last seen the week of Jan. 13, 2001, just before Bill Clinton relinquished the White House to George W. Bush.

Inflation is on it's way.

MOst of that rise was from fuel cost.....

You say that like it is a good thing. Do you own stock in Bush and Co. company? Rising prices due to an increase in the price of anything except labor is bad.

 

[Ldir]

Originally posted by: dirtboy
My whole problem with this BS of the liberal left is how elitest they are. They think people should reach a certain standard and only go up. If I lost my job and I couldn't find another, I'd do anything to take care of myself and my family and only once I exausted those means, would I turn to the government for help.

In the last two weeks there were more than 200 jobs available. In this area we regularly have an unemployment rate of 10%, but apparently many of those 10% don't want to work, because if that was the case, the want ads would be nearly empty all the time. The fact of the matter is, people are lazy and they think they are better than what they actually may be. They need to stop crying and relying on the government, get a job and get back to where they were. But if you ask Dave & Co, all these people are dying in the streets.

This is crap. You counted 200 job ads. So what? Do you realize you can't walk up and claim a job and start working? You have to be qualifed. You have to be offered the job. Are your unemployed qualified for those jobs? Do you know for a fact the employers received no applicants, or did the employer reject the applicants? How do you know they are real openings? They may be recruiters trolling for resumes. How many thousand people are unemployed in your area? Would 200 jobs even make a dent?

You are as bad as Dubya and his stooges. You pick bits of information out of context and use them to support your bias. You have no idea what is really going on.

Like I've said over and over, if you are out of work for 6 months+, you much be pretty damn rich to keep on living. I know very few people that can continue on without an income. So life must not be too bad for all those "unemployed" people who are so desperate for work. As long as there are jobs available, no matter how demeaning, I won't feel sorry for the one of them.

Typical Bush apologist. You deny we are losing good jobs but then tell people they must settle for demeaning jobs. Are we losing good jobs or not?

--------------------
Bush Apologists of America (BAA): pulling the wool over America's eyes since 1980

 

[dirtboy]

Originally posted by: Ldir

Originally posted by: dirtboy
My whole problem with this BS of the liberal left is how elitest they are. They think people should reach a certain standard and only go up. If I lost my job and I couldn't find another, I'd do anything to take care of myself and my family and only once I exausted those means, would I turn to the government for help.

In the last two weeks there were more than 200 jobs available. In this area we regularly have an unemployment rate of 10%, but apparently many of those 10% don't want to work, because if that was the case, the want ads would be nearly empty all the time. The fact of the matter is, people are lazy and they think they are better than what they actually may be. They need to stop crying and relying on the government, get a job and get back to where they were. But if you ask Dave & Co, all these people are dying in the streets.

This is crap. You counted 200 job ads. So what? Do you realize you can't walk up and claim a job and start working? You have to be qualifed. You have to be offered the job. Are your unemployed qualified for those jobs? Do you know for a fact the employers received no applicants, or did the employer reject the applicants? How do you know they are real openings? They may be recruiters trolling for resumes. How many thousand people are unemployed in your area? Would 200 jobs even make a dent?

You are as bad as Dubya and his stooges. You pick bits of information out of context and use them to support your bias. You have no idea what is really going on.

I am biased because there are actually jobs. Wow. That's pretty dumb, but then again did come from you.

I am just saying, and I know this is a tough concept for people like you to grasp, but if people are as bad off and desperate for work as you claim, then there wouldn't be any jobs available. They aren't desperate, because they are elitest like you and think they are too good for work. And like I've said all along, when you've got a wife and kids to feed, you should be willing to do anything to take care of them, rather than sit at home and wait for companies to call you. What would you know about that, you're not a real man who would take care of his responsibilities. Just a little boy who runs around crying and calling everyone he disagrees with an "apologist."

Like I've said over and over, if you are out of work for 6 months+, you much be pretty damn rich to keep on living. I know very few people that can continue on without an income. So life must not be too bad for all those "unemployed" people who are so desperate for work. As long as there are jobs available, no matter how demeaning, I won't feel sorry for the one of them.

Typical Bush apologist. You deny we are losing good jobs but then tell people they must settle for demeaning jobs. Are we losing good jobs or not?[/quote]

How is that appologizing for anyone? Oh that's right, it's not. I forget you are one of those Bush haters who has to get your dig in at every opportunity. Then again, you are an elistest who things they are better than everyone else. I guess now work is too good for people like you, because you are used to getting a hand out from the government. Maybe you should learn to rely on yourself instead of government handouts.

 

[Ferocious]

Tough Times in the Labor Underground

On the street in the real world.....good jobs are scarce and hard to find.

Keep in mind that this site is very pro-business and nearly always paints a brighter picture than what reality is.

Bush's vaunted attack on the middle class continues......

 

[dirtboy]

Originally posted by: Ferocious

Bush's vaunted attack on the middle class continues......

Yea, because according to the liberal left, tax cuts destroy the middle class.

And that's why they want Kerry, because he'll give the middle class another tax cut...what, what's that...libs now say tax cuts are good.

No wonder they like Kerry, they change their mind more than he does.

Maybe you and Ldir can get together and bash Bush and blame him for all your personal problems while your at it.

 

[LordMagnusKain]

I think Greenspan has been doing an excellent job of keeping inflation in check.

so your an in greenspan i trust kind of guy...

well, hopefully your right; but i think he was trying to avoid Japanese like deflation as such is over-priming the economy and unless we get some fiscal responsibility soon in the gov we're going to see 70s level inflation.

Having to go DOWN in salary in a major way yet you and CAD & Co keep insisting wages are going up. Hmmmm

one sector adjusting for new trainees isn't an economy wide change in income

Do you realize you can't walk up and claim a job and start working? You have to be qualifed.

this is bad? Last i checked better division of labor and better training brought us better overall production.

Are your unemployed qualified for those jobs? Do you know for a fact the employers received no applicants, or did the employer reject the applicants?

it is hardly anyones fault if you can't hold a job or get enough education to get a proper job;

I'll tell you this, a boss will higher a lower-educated energetic hard worker 9 times out of 10 over a lackadaisical educated worker. But then these things don't matter when you enter a socilized system.

They may be recruiters trolling for resumes. How many thousand people are unemployed in your area? Would 200 jobs even make a dent?

people being poor-workers isn't the governments fault. 200 jobs in any city makes a difference, more jobs is more jobs is more jobs.. a good deal better than no job offers.

You deny we are losing good jobs but then tell people they must settle for demeaning jobs

No such animal sr. any job a man takes is going to be as honorable and respectable as the man taking the job. There are plenty of engineers who demean themselves in their job much more than the janitor that cleans the engeneer's pubic hair off the toilet.

demeaning, demeaning is to not take a low-paying blue-collar job because you can suck off of someone else.

 

[Ldir]

Originally posted by: LordMagnusKain

Do you realize you can't walk up and claim a job and start working? You have to be qualifed.

this is bad? Last i checked better division of labor and better training brought us better overall production.

Are your unemployed qualified for those jobs? Do you know for a fact the employers received no applicants, or did the employer reject the applicants?

it is hardly anyones fault if you can't hold a job or get enough education to get a proper job;

I'll tell you this, a boss will higher a lower-educated energetic hard worker 9 times out of 10 over a lackadaisical educated worker. But then these things don't matter when you enter a socilized system.

They may be recruiters trolling for resumes. How many thousand people are unemployed in your area? Would 200 jobs even make a dent?

people being poor-workers isn't the governments fault. 200 jobs in any city makes a difference, more jobs is more jobs is more jobs.. a good deal better than no job offers.

You deny we are losing good jobs but then tell people they must settle for demeaning jobs

No such animal sr. any job a man takes is going to be as honorable and respectable as the man taking the job. There are plenty of engineers who demean themselves in their job much more than the janitor that cleans the engeneer's pubic hair off the toilet.

demeaning, demeaning is to not take a low-paying blue-collar job because you can suck off of someone else.

You took my comments totally out of context. I was rebutting dorkboy's trash. He called them demeaning jobs. He thinks qualifications do not matter. He thinks jobless people can walk up and take any opening they want. He thinks all jobless people are worthless scum.

 

[Ldir]

Originally posted by: dirtboy

Originally posted by: Ldir

Originally posted by: dirtboy
My whole problem with this BS of the liberal left is how elitest they are. They think people should reach a certain standard and only go up. If I lost my job and I couldn't find another, I'd do anything to take care of myself and my family and only once I exausted those means, would I turn to the government for help.

In the last two weeks there were more than 200 jobs available. In this area we regularly have an unemployment rate of 10%, but apparently many of those 10% don't want to work, because if that was the case, the want ads would be nearly empty all the time. The fact of the matter is, people are lazy and they think they are better than what they actually may be. They need to stop crying and relying on the government, get a job and get back to where they were. But if you ask Dave & Co, all these people are dying in the streets.

This is crap. You counted 200 job ads. So what? Do you realize you can't walk up and claim a job and start working? You have to be qualifed. You have to be offered the job. Are your unemployed qualified for those jobs? Do you know for a fact the employers received no applicants, or did the employer reject the applicants? How do you know they are real openings? They may be recruiters trolling for resumes. How many thousand people are unemployed in your area? Would 200 jobs even make a dent?

You are as bad as Dubya and his stooges. You pick bits of information out of context and use them to support your bias. You have no idea what is really going on.

I am biased because there are actually jobs. Wow. That's pretty dumb, but then again did come from you.

I am just saying, and I know this is a tough concept for people like you to grasp, but if people are as bad off and desperate for work as you claim, then there wouldn't be any jobs available. They aren't desperate, because they are elitest like you and think they are too good for work. And like I've said all along, when you've got a wife and kids to feed, you should be willing to do anything to take care of them, rather than sit at home and wait for companies to call you. What would you know about that, you're not a real man who would take care of his responsibilities. Just a little boy who runs around crying and calling everyone he disagrees with an "apologist."

I have a job. The only handout I ever got was school loans. I repaid them. How about you? What do you do? Do you even have a job? I bet you are a professional poster child for the Special Olympics. No. You are too clueless to work. I bet you are a spoiled kid, mad at daddy because he is unemployed and will not buy you an Xbox. You are just a little dorkboy who runs around crying that everyone who is unemployed is a lazy as your deadbeat dad. Did I guess right?

You just don't get it. There is a difference between job ads and qualified applicants. An ad for nurses is worthless unless you are a nurse. If you really think 10% of your neighbors are unemployed because they are lazy, you are an idiot.

Like I've said over and over, if you are out of work for 6 months+, you much be pretty damn rich to keep on living. I know very few people that can continue on without an income. So life must not be too bad for all those "unemployed" people who are so desperate for work. As long as there are jobs available, no matter how demeaning, I won't feel sorry for the one of them.

Typical Bush apologist. You deny we are losing good jobs but then tell people they must settle for demeaning jobs. Are we losing good jobs or not?

How is that appologizing for anyone? Oh that's right, it's not. I forget you are one of those Bush haters who has to get your dig in at every opportunity. Then again, you are an elistest who things they are better than everyone else. I guess now work is too good for people like you, because you are used to getting a hand out from the government. Maybe you should learn to rely on yourself instead of government handouts.

You are the elistist dorkboy. You are the one spewing sanctimonious trash about other people. Typical Bush apologist. You make excuses for his failures. You blame the victims.

Are you going to answer the question? You deny we are losing good jobs but then tell people they must settle for demeaning jobs. Are we losing good jobs or not?


--------------------
Bush Apologists of America (BAA): pulling the wool over America's eyes since 1980

 

[charrison]

Originally posted by: Spencer278

Originally posted by: charrison

Originally posted by: LordMagnusKain

Originally posted by: TheGameIs21
New Jobless Claims Down, Wholesale Prices Up

Spin this dems....

The Labor Department reported Thursday that the number of laid-off workers seeking jobless benefits fell by 6,000 last week to 336,000, a level that was last seen the week of Jan. 13, 2001, just before Bill Clinton relinquished the White House to George W. Bush.

Inflation is on it's way.

MOst of that rise was from fuel cost.....

You say that like it is a good thing. Do you own stock in Bush and Co. company? Rising prices due to an increase in the price of anything except labor is bad.

I say like, minus oil, prices are stable and inflation is not an issue.

 

[Bowfinger]

Originally posted by: charrison
I say like, minus oil, prices are stable and inflation is not an issue.

I don't understand your reasoning. How does the fact that oil prices are the major factor mitigate the threat of inflation?

 

[charrison]

Originally posted by: Bowfinger

Originally posted by: charrison
I say like, minus oil, prices are stable and inflation is not an issue.

I don't understand your reasoning. How does the fact that oil prices are the major factor mitigate the threat of inflation?

Did you bother reading the report? Rising oil prices were the main cause of the rise in the PPI report. Minus oil prices, prices are stable.

 

[AEB]

It has been shown that when unempoyment runs out people start looking for jobs. Why not get free money?
The economy is growing too slow and steady for their to be inflation.
If kerry wins he will get credit fot the current recovering economy. You can quote me on that.
I live in alaska and the unemployment rate is 6%, yet i cant drive a mile without seeing at least 3 help wanted signs. Riding the unemployment wave!
Social programs do not work

 

[dmcowen674]

Originally posted by: AEB
It has been shown that when unempoyment runs out people start looking for jobs. Why not get free money?
The economy is growing too slow and steady for their to be inflation.
If kerry wins he will get credit fot the current recovering economy. You can quote me on that.
I live in alaska and the unemployment rate is 6%, yet i cant drive a mile without seeing at least 3 help wanted signs. Riding the unemployment wave!
Social programs do not work

Total Bullsh1t again. Unemployment was not extended back in December.

Let's hear the details of those "jobs" that those "Employers" can't seem to fill no matter what.

Oh and you're in Alaska, one of if not the lowest population and boasting about a 6% unemployment rate.

 

[Bowfinger]

Originally posted by: charrison

Originally posted by: Bowfinger

Originally posted by: charrison
I say like, minus oil, prices are stable and inflation is not an issue.

I don't understand your reasoning. How does the fact that oil prices are the major factor mitigate the threat of inflation?

Did you bother reading the report? Rising oil prices were the main cause of the rise in the PPI report. Minus oil prices, prices are stable.

Actually, they're increasing at an annual rate of about 3.7%, but that's not my point. How can one arbitrarily decide to exclude energy prices just because they increased? People will still pay more to heat their homes and fill their gas tanks. That's less money in people's pockets, increasing pressure on wages. What other factors can we ignore if they increase: food, clothing, housing?

I'm not trying to argue with you. I'm trying to understand your reasoning. How does the fact that oil prices are the major factor mitigate the threat of inflation? What makes oil special, that it can be excluded?

 

[charrison]

Originally posted by: Bowfinger

Originally posted by: charrison

Originally posted by: Bowfinger

Originally posted by: charrison
I say like, minus oil, prices are stable and inflation is not an issue.

I don't understand your reasoning. How does the fact that oil prices are the major factor mitigate the threat of inflation?

Did you bother reading the report? Rising oil prices were the main cause of the rise in the PPI report. Minus oil prices, prices are stable.

Actually, they're increasing at an annual rate of about 3.7%, but that's not my point. How can one arbitrarily decide to exclude energy prices just because they increased? People will still pay more to heat their homes and fill their gas tanks. That's less money in people's pockets, increasing pressure on wages. What other factors can we ignore if they increase: food, clothing, housing?

I'm not trying to argue with you. I'm trying to understand your reasoning. How does the fact that oil prices are the major factor mitigate the threat of inflation? What makes oil special, that it can be excluded?

Will you be the first to scream deflation if oil prices drop in the future? I wont deny people will pay more heating oil and transportation, but this is only 1 factor in the report.

 

[Bowfinger]

Originally posted by: charrison

Originally posted by: Bowfinger

Originally posted by: charrison

Originally posted by: Bowfinger

Originally posted by: charrison
I say like, minus oil, prices are stable and inflation is not an issue.

I don't understand your reasoning. How does the fact that oil prices are the major factor mitigate the threat of inflation?

Did you bother reading the report? Rising oil prices were the main cause of the rise in the PPI report. Minus oil prices, prices are stable.

Actually, they're increasing at an annual rate of about 3.7%, but that's not my point. How can one arbitrarily decide to exclude energy prices just because they increased? People will still pay more to heat their homes and fill their gas tanks. That's less money in people's pockets, increasing pressure on wages. What other factors can we ignore if they increase: food, clothing, housing?

I'm not trying to argue with you. I'm trying to understand your reasoning. How does the fact that oil prices are the major factor mitigate the threat of inflation? What makes oil special, that it can be excluded?

Will you be the first to scream deflation if oil prices drop in the future? I wont deny people will pay more heating oil and transportation, but this is only 1 factor in the report.

Chill. Take off your partisan hat for a moment. I am not screaming anything. That was uncalled for. I'm not even saying you are wrong. I'm asking a question. If you don't know the answer, just say so.

Yes, I would expect that if lower energy prices bring down the overall rate of inflation, I would acknowledge it. What am I missing? Why would I consider energy to be different from the myriad other factors in the PPI? It's not a challenge. It's just a question.

 

[dmcowen674]

Originally posted by: charrison


Will you be the first to scream deflation if oil prices drop in the future? I wont deny people will pay more heating oil and transportation, but this is only 1 factor in the report.

For crying out loud, talk about Waffling. Just a few short months ago the guy you worship Greenscum was screaming "Deflation, Deflation, Deflation" .

No such thing and you know it. Can't believe the massive drop in quality of your posts, they used to be not half bad even if wrong.

 

[charrison]

Originally posted by: Bowfinger

Originally posted by: charrison

Originally posted by: Bowfinger

Originally posted by: charrison

Originally posted by: Bowfinger

Originally posted by: charrison
I say like, minus oil, prices are stable and inflation is not an issue.

I don't understand your reasoning. How does the fact that oil prices are the major factor mitigate the threat of inflation?

Did you bother reading the report? Rising oil prices were the main cause of the rise in the PPI report. Minus oil prices, prices are stable.

Actually, they're increasing at an annual rate of about 3.7%, but that's not my point. How can one arbitrarily decide to exclude energy prices just because they increased? People will still pay more to heat their homes and fill their gas tanks. That's less money in people's pockets, increasing pressure on wages. What other factors can we ignore if they increase: food, clothing, housing?

I'm not trying to argue with you. I'm trying to understand your reasoning. How does the fact that oil prices are the major factor mitigate the threat of inflation? What makes oil special, that it can be excluded?

Will you be the first to scream deflation if oil prices drop in the future? I wont deny people will pay more heating oil and transportation, but this is only 1 factor in the report.

Chill. Take off your partisan hat for a moment. I am not screaming anything. That was uncalled for. I'm not even saying you are wrong. I'm asking a question. If you don't know the answer, just say so.

Yes, I would expect that if lower energy prices bring down the overall rate of inflation, I would acknowledge it. What am I missing? Why would I consider energy to be different from the myriad other factors in the PPI? It's not a challenge. It's just a question.

Well when a myraid of factors are stable and one is rising, I dont think this means it is time to sound alarm bells.

 

[charrison]

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: charrison


Will you be the first to scream deflation if oil prices drop in the future? I wont deny people will pay more heating oil and transportation, but this is only 1 factor in the report.

For crying out loud, talk about Waffling. Just a few short months ago the guy you worship Greenscum was screaming "Deflation, Deflation, Deflation" .

No such thing and you know it. Can't believe the massive drop in quality of your posts, they used to be not half bad even if wrong.

I dont worship greenspan, but I know he has a better clue of what the economy is doing as opposed to the nonsense you post.