Bank of America to pay back 45 billion of bailout money.

 

No big surprise, all of these companies want out from under the Feds.

No big surprise, all of these companies want out from under the Feds.

Exactly. So far, it looks to me like TARP has been far more successful than the Stimulus Bill. TARP has been seeing regular returns plus good interest, and the actual cost/losses will likely be only a small fraction of the originally allowed $700B in funding.

 

Exactly. So far, it looks to me like TARP has been far more successful than the Stimulus Bill. TARP has been seeing regular returns plus good interest, and the actual cost/losses will likely be only a small fraction of the originally allowed $700B in funding.

 

In reality, the TARP program actually got in and fixed the real problem. The Stimulus really hasn't done that.

In reality, the TARP program actually got in and fixed the real problem. The Stimulus really hasn't done that.

I pretty much agree. I think some aspects of TARP could have been handled better, but considering the time constraints they were under to act massively, they did reasonably well, IMO.

 

The Stimulus Bill, so far, appears to have partially addressed some short term employment issues. And that is worth something. But I think long term, its a pretty big bust. We'll see if I'm wrong in the next few years.

 

Just when they say everything is ok, CDS of Dubai Holding Commercial Operations Group are absolutely blowing out today, up 738.77 bps, 62%.

I pretty much agree. I think some aspects of TARP could have been handled better, but considering the time constraints they were under to act massively, they did reasonably well, IMO.

 

The Stimulus Bill, so far, appears to have partially addressed some short term employment issues. And that is worth something. But I think long term, its a pretty big bust. We'll see if I'm wrong in the next few years.

 

A stimulus bill is, by definition, a short - medium term push, no?

A stimulus bill is, by definition, a short - medium term push, no?

If it was done properly, no, it doesn't need to be just one or the other. And I am not opposed to SOME of it being immediate and short-lived - infrastructure can be both. But it needs to have its roots in sustainable job growth, and it didn't do that.

 

 

Unemployment rate drops from 10.2% to 10.0%

Underemployment rate drops from 17.5% to 17.2%

Average work week jumps from 33.0 to 33.2

Average weekly salary up.

Total jobs lost for the month drops from 111,000 in October to 11,000 in November.

Unemployment rate drops from 10.2% to 10.0%

Underemployment rate drops from 17.5% to 17.2%

Average work week jumps from 33.0 to 33.2

Average weekly salary up.

Total jobs lost for the month drops from 111,000 in October to 11,000 in November.

Yeah I saw that this morning. I am more optimistic about the economy right now than many in this forum, but even I did not expect any notable drop like that.

 

But really, of all those numbers, the most important one to me is the 11,000 job losses. That is getting damn close to zero, which means there is some significant hiring going on, which I did not at all expect at this stage.

 

I think the next really interesting inflection point will be in early January, when we see the December (and holiday season) retail numbers.

 

on a side note, i personally love those who will attack these numbers.

 

its almost as if they would prefer if the % went up, or the number of job losses got larger. It's not great, but realize that its better than what we've been experiencing.

on a side note, i personally love those who will attack these numbers.

 

its almost as if they would prefer if the % went up, or the number of job losses got larger. It's not great, but realize that its better than what we've been experiencing.

Well, some of the numbers are, in general, easy to attack. There are any number of different ways to measure unemployment. But the fact that all the major metrics went down together should indicate a real improvement, albeit a small one.

 

And really it IS possible this is an aberration, though there are a lot of different indicators over multiple weeks and months that seem to say things are stabilizing and even improving in some areas. Furthermore, some people believe that this stabilization can't last because it won't be accompanied with job growth - and therefore, we'd double-dip. But that's why I said the 11,000 number is so key.

 

Also, I don't think anyone really WANTS it to get worse. I just think its a lot easier to claim DOOOOOOOOM with anything and everything, than to be more pragmatic, or even optimistic. Its the same with the Sox. If you constantly say everyone is a bum, the team sucks, blah blah blah... its a win-win. If they are right, they are right. If they are wrong, their team is good, they are happy. Same goes for anything where people take a stake. Its a subconscious thing I see a lot of people do.

 

Put another less dramatic way, its better to be pleasantly surprised than disappointed.

 

Yeah I saw that this morning. I am more optimistic about the economy right now than many in this forum, but even I did not expect any notable drop like that.

 

But really, of all those numbers, the most important one to me is the 11,000 job losses. That is getting damn close to zero, which means there is some significant hiring going on, which I did not at all expect at this stage.

 

I think the next really interesting inflection point will be in early January, when we see the December (and holiday season) retail numbers.

 

It's seasonally adjusted too, if this was a "regular" month, it would have shown job growth in six figures.

I think the next really interesting inflection point will be in early January, when we see the December (and holiday season) retail numbers.

 

There is also a lot of ground to make up. 7+ million jobs lost is going to be hard to reconcile. Will a jobless recovery still be a recovery when the numbers were this big? 5 months after the recession formally ended there are still jobs losses. At this stage in the jobless recovery in 2002, jobs gains were being seen already. It will be interesting to see what happens in 2010. But November was very good news, only 11k jobs lost.

Edited December 4, 200916 yr by mr_genius

There is also a lot of ground to make up. 7+ million jobs lost is going to be hard to reconcile. Will a jobless recovery still be a recovery when the numbers were this big? 5 months after the recession formally ended there are still jobs losses. At this stage in the jobless recovery in 2002, jobs gains were being seen already. It will be interesting to see what happens in 2010. But November was very good news, only 11k jobs lost.

Oh there is a LOT to make up. I think everyone has known for a while this is a much deeper and longer recession that what we saw in 2002, or in the early 90's, or really any going back to the 30's. And while this is good news (this recent month's picture), you really need to build bigger ongoing momentum to start eating away significant chunks of that job loss. It will take years, even under the best case scenarios. This is one of the reasons why I keep harping on the Stimulus Bill having been far too short-sighted.

 

Oh there is a LOT to make up. I think everyone has known for a while this is a much deeper and longer recession that what we saw in 2002, or in the early 90's, or really any going back to the 30's. And while this is good news (this recent month's picture), you really need to build bigger ongoing momentum to start eating away significant chunks of that job loss. It will take years, even under the best case scenarios. This is one of the reasons why I keep harping on the Stimulus Bill having been far too short-sighted.

 

Not as much short-sighted as unfocused on the main problems. It would have been nice to have that other 90ish percent of the money still to come in that bill to be able to adjust to this recession on the fly, instead we have to sit and wait, and hope... And, oh yeah, pass another jobs bill because the first one isn't working right.

Not as much short-sighted as unfocused on the main problems. It would have been nice to have that other 90ish percent of the money still to come in that bill to be able to adjust to this recession on the fly, instead we have to sit and wait, and hope... And, oh yeah, pass another jobs bill because the first one isn't working right.

I think the better plan would have been to have been both short term AND long term addressed.

 

Tax breaks in the short term that would add jobs - like house greening stuff and appliances (Cash for Clunkers was actually a good one). Also some of these quick construction jobs, but, ones that pay off longer term, like new bypasses and connector freeways that cut down travel times, etc.

 

But at least half, or more, should have been investing in long term thinking. Engineering jobs created in alt energy, efficiency built up by improving rail transit, etc.

 

Instead, we got a whole lot of re-paving roads that already exist, which is really not what we needed (or at least, not needed as much as other things).

 

 

I think the better plan would have been to have been both short term AND long term addressed.

 

Tax breaks in the short term that would add jobs - like house greening stuff and appliances (Cash for Clunkers was actually a good one). Also some of these quick construction jobs, but, ones that pay off longer term, like new bypasses and connector freeways that cut down travel times, etc.

 

But at least half, or more, should have been investing in long term thinking. Engineering jobs created in alt energy, efficiency built up by improving rail transit, etc.

 

Instead, we got a whole lot of re-paving roads that already exist, which is really not what we needed (or at least, not needed as much as other things).

I'm really pissed that the useless road construction money didn't go to help cities with capital improvements on mass transit instead. There isn't any one person to blame for that so I'll just blame Congress collectively.

I'm really pissed that the useless road construction money didn't go to help cities with capital improvements on mass transit instead. There isn't any one person to blame for that so I'll just blame Congress collectively.

Without a doubt Congress gets most of the blame. Obama gets some too, though.

 

For all the focus we have put on Obama and Bush though, if you leave the war aspects aside, most of the major f***ing up in the last decade or so can be much more attributed to Congress than either President.

 

Without a doubt Congress gets most of the blame. Obama gets some too, though.

 

For all the focus we have put on Obama and Bush though, if you leave the war aspects aside, most of the major f***ing up in the last decade or so can be much more attributed to Congress than either President.

Which is why the GOP got thrown out in 2006 - they spent themselves into oblivion. And that just got dwarfed by this Congress.

 

Which is why the GOP got thrown out in 2006 - they spent themselves into oblivion. And that just got dwarfed by this Congress.

You really, truly think that the problem in 2006 was that the Congress spent too much? And not that they followed Bush blindly into a disastrous war? Or blew out candles on birthday cakes while a city drowned? Or had the median wage stagnate while only the top tax bracket saw any growth for nearly a decade? Frankly, no.

Unemployment rate drops from 10.2% to 10.0%

Underemployment rate drops from 17.5% to 17.2%

Average work week jumps from 33.0 to 33.2

Average weekly salary up.

Total jobs lost for the month drops from 111,000 in October to 11,000 in November.

 

 

on a side note, i personally love those who will attack these numbers.

 

its almost as if they would prefer if the % went up, or the number of job losses got larger. It's not great, but realize that its better than what we've been experiencing.

http://www.economicpolicyjournal.com/2009/...attens-out.html

 

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB125876514545758393.html

 

This is just a small sample of what's behind the numbers. The fallacy of "seasonally adjusted" needs to stop being spread around.

 

Celebrate good times, come on! (Let's celebrate)

Celebrate good times, come on! (Let's celebrate)

 

There's a party goin' on right here

A celebration to last throughout the years

So bring your good times, and your laughter too

We gonna celebrate your party with you

 

Come on now

 

Celebration

Let's all celebrate and have a good time

Celebration

We gonna celebrate and have a good time

 

It's time to come together

It's up to you, what's your pleasure

 

Everyone around the world

Come on!

 

Yahoo! It's a celebration

Yahoo!

 

Celebrate good times, come on!

It's a celebration

Celebrate good times, come on!

Let's celebrate

 

We're gonna have a good time tonight

Let's celebrate, it's all right

We're gonna have a good time tonight

Let's celebrate, it's all right

 

Baby...

 

We're gonna have a good time tonight (Ce-le-bra-tion)

Let's celebrate, it's all right

We're gonna have a good time tonight (Ce-le-bra-tion)

Let's celebrate, it's all right

 

Yahoo!

Yahoo!

 

Celebrate good times, come on! (Let's celebrate)

Celebrate good times, come on!

It's a celebration!

Celebrate good times, come on! (Let's celebrate)

 

CNN had a report on green jobs. They begrudgingly admitted that over 70% of 'green jobs' created have been overseas and that there is no way that trend will end with the current status quo.

http://www.economicpolicyjournal.com/2009/...attens-out.html

I'm as pessimistic as anyone about the long-term prospects since the stimulus was too small, but saying "oh it's just a surge in temporary hiring" is moronic. Temporary hiring increases tend to presage long-term hiring at the end of a recession because companies don't want to commit to long-term hiring until they're certain the recession is ending.

CNN had a report on green jobs. They begrudgingly admitted that over 70% of 'green jobs' created have been overseas and that there is no way that trend will end with the current status quo.

So 30% of the world's green jobs are coming in a country with 2% of the world's population and 25% of the world' GDP? That's absolutely fantastic. That would mean we've caught up from the huge deficit the last administration left us with in less than a year.

So 30% of the world's green jobs are coming in a country with 2% of the world's population? That's absolutely fantastic.

 

lol too bad 100% of the dollars were US tax payer funded. it was about US 'green jobs' government money being spent.