unemployment up to 9.6%

#101
#101
BigPapaVol said:
I know making crap up is your way, but the spike isn't remotely related to Glass Steagal and is absolutely related to lending in the old margins. Fannie / Freddie are the lone reason said lending started.

I never said it's a metric of real prosperity. It is the best route to real wealth in America because the 30 year mortgage made it affordable and it's essentially forced savings. Has nothing to do with being an indicator of anything. If I'm advising someone young in building wealth, it starts with a home on a 15 year note. Precludes rental waste and forces savings.

I know you want to attribute something to Keynesian gibberish, but that boom was driven almost solely by mortgage lending and people transitioning to long term jobs in our economy. The long term job transition was more of a shift in the structure of our economy than it was any socialist thinking about the economy.
Click to expand...

First sentence = hogwash, pure and simple, and 1 trillion in liquidity (and another 800BN in stimulus) prove me right.

As for the rest: a shift in our structure to Keynesian policies. Thanks. :hi:
 
#103
#103
Actually my chart showed it took many years to get close to your numbers. It took well over 15 years after WWII before Germany came close to below 2% UE. As my France examples show, their numbers were not even close to what you showed. I'm not sure HOW I proved your point.
 
#104
#104
utgibbs said:
First sentence = hogwash, pure and simple, and 1 trillion in liquidity (and another 800BN in stimulus) prove me right.

As for the rest: a shift in our structure to Keynesian policies. Thanks. :hi:
Click to expand...

I actually think you know nothing about economics, micro or macro.

Do you actually have any idea what Glass-Steagall did? Tell me about how that drove mortgage takers through the roof. Please tell me that you understand the Chinese Wall.

Look, I know you're pulling massive amounts of this silliness from other sites and that you wouldn't understand enough detail to knit a vest for a gnat, but at least get your kids to come help you. Maybe they know something or we can teach them something before you ruin more people.
 
#105
#105
utgibbs said:
Uh, his chart just proved me right, MG.

Moreover, it is CRUCIAL to remember that the transition out of Keynesian policy has also resulted in a stagnation of real wages. The period of state supported / Keynesian policies marks the fastest and most prolific increase in across the board earnings in history. As you can see, the real results of the "Age of Hayek" (ca. 1973) has been income polarization - certainly not "wealth creation".

whatstheproblem-figure2-version2.png
Click to expand...

once again you use this stupidity that if your neighbor has more money than you do that means you are poor. i see a real rise in wages adjusted for inflation for 70 years. if that isn't wealth creation i don't know what is.
 
Last edited:
#106
#106
CSpindizzy said:
Actually my chart showed it took many years to get close to your numbers. It took well over 15 years after WWII before Germany came close to below 2% UE. As my France examples show, their numbers were not even close to what you showed. I'm not sure HOW I proved your point.
Click to expand...

I didn't see any French data, sorry.

German unemployment went down to under 1% under the Keynesian regime. Your graph demonstrated that.

Point proven.
 
#107
#107
BigPapaVol said:
I actually think you know nothing about economics, micro or macro.

Do you actually have any idea what Glass-Steagall did? Tell me about how that drove mortgage takers through the roof. Please tell me that you understand the Chinese Wall.

Look, I know you're pulling massive amounts of this silliness from other sites and that you wouldn't understand enough detail to knit a vest for a gnat, but at least get your kids to come help you. Maybe they know something or we can teach them something before you ruin more people.
Click to expand...

G-S was the mechanism by which the changes were wrought. And remember, its repeal was orchestrated by Reich as a last favor for his investment coterie.

The reason the changes had to be made were simple: a Crisis in Capital Accumulation.
 
#108
#108
utgibbs said:
Again, it's these graphs which make clear the real mission of the "Age of Friedman / Hayek". Its mission has been the restoration of elite class power. It is difficult to call it "wealth creation" when the majority of people have seen no real increase in wealth.

earnings4-1024x701-1.jpeg


Notice the precipitous decline under Reagan as well. Interesting.
Click to expand...

The decline began before Reagan. Interesting.
 
#109
#109
utgibbs said:
G-S was the mechanism by which the changes were wrought. And remember, its repeal was orchestrated by Reich as a last favor for his investment coterie.

The reason the changes had to be made were simple: a Crisis in Capital Accumulation.
Click to expand...

no it wasn't. G-S is about the Chinese Wall coming down in banks. The mechanism for allowing essentially no underwriting was Freddie and Fannie willing to implicitly guarantee a bunch of crap loans and not being able to be selective about it because that would be discrimination, which they proclaim to be helping overcome.

The crisis accumulation silliness you talk about implies that folks like Calpers aren't representative of jillions of people who don't trust Social Security, another of Keynes and FDR's disasters, to be available when they need it.
 
#110
#110
CSpindizzy said:
The decline began before Reagan. Interesting.
Click to expand...

why bother even responding to such a ridiculous interpretation of the driver. If someone isn't willing to or can't understand the stats they're stealing from some other lunatic lefty, why try to help them out of the dark?

Wonder what the steep 90s climb was about? Hmmm.
 
#111
#111
The German unemployment rate began increasing after '70 all the way up to unification. Explain that increase?
 
#112
#112
it's well known the east germans were among the laziest workers on the planet by the time the wall fell down. West germans among the worlds hardest and most efficient workers. wonder why?
 
#113
#113
When you are handed the basics and that is your ceiling, why bother to work harder than you need to? It's not like you were rewarded for the extra work. No overtime. No fat raises and promotions. There was no desire to bust your rear to get the better cars, televisions, clothes, etc.
 
#115
#115
CSpindizzy said:
When you are handed the basics and that is your ceiling, why bother to work harder than you need to? It's not like you were rewarded for the extra work. No overtime. No fat raises and promotions. There was no desire to bust your rear to get the better cars, televisions, clothes, etc.
Click to expand...

A would question the rationality of this. Personally, I'm not happy being called a "consumer" on the nightly news. I recoil in horror when W. told the American people, "Go out and shop!" after 9/11.

The system is in deep crisis (obviously). I think we need to rethink ALL the fundamentals.
 
#116
#116
CSpindizzy said:
The German unemployment rate began increasing after '70 all the way up to unification. Explain that increase?
Click to expand...

The move away from Keynesian policy of full employment to a monetarist policy. This ushered in the "Age of Hayekman"

Policy driven for full employment switched to monetarist policy. The real results can be seen in the two / three graphs I have provided.
 
#118
#118
BigPapaVol said:
why bother even responding to such a ridiculous interpretation of the driver. If someone isn't willing to or can't understand the stats they're stealing from some other lunatic lefty, why try to help them out of the dark?

Wonder what the steep 90s climb was about? Hmmm.
Click to expand...

The steep climb in the 1990s is exactly our current predicament.

If you think the Hoover Institute is "leftist" you will probably never rid yourself of the well-earned GoF-Emeritus title.
 
#119
#119
droski said:
and it dropped after that because. . .
Click to expand...

Has it dropped? I thought this thread was the 9.6% unemployment thread.

It "dropped" during the 1980s because we changed accounting procedures. We decided it looked better if we shaved 50 - 100% off the number of unemployed.
 
#120
#120
i see so in your opinion in the 90s we had a bad labor market and worse than france and it was all "accounting procedures?"
 
Last edited:
#122
#122
utgibbs said:
The move away from Keynesian policy of full employment to a monetarist policy. This ushered in the "Age of Hayekman"

Policy driven for full employment switched to monetarist policy. The real results can be seen in the two / three graphs I have provided.
Click to expand...

Do you have any proof? The increase began while Germany was still under a Keynesian model. I seriously doubt a member of the SPD would have moved to a monetarist model as well. Also, are you saying Schroeder had a monetarist policy?
 
#123
#123
droski said:
i see so in your opinion in the 90s we had a bad labor market and worse than france and it was all "accounting procedures?"
Click to expand...

I thought we were talking about the Keynesian period. If you would like to start discussing Hayekmanyears, the unemployment question is pushed into the background championing instead monetarist policies.
 
#125
#125
utgibbs said:
Looks like there was a mini recovery during the Carter years in real wage growth to me. Carter was Pres in 1977.
Click to expand...

We must be looking at the same chart. In simple terms the blue goes up BEFORE Carter comes in office. Once Carter is in office the line goes down and begins to level off with Reagan.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top