Today's News | Christian Views
| Home | Community | WorldMagBlog | Commentary | Previous Posts | Podcasts | Contact Us | Subscribe |
Centers of the battle
We know why God loves cities. We also know why God hated Sodom.
FULL STORY
'Horror film': Nigerian Christians fear for their lives after another brutal attack
Second chance?: An important debate on the future of the D.C. school voucher program begins
President Obama, as part of a final push to pass healthcare reform, will appear on Fox News Wednesday.
Settlements continue: Israel continues building in the West Bank, despite assurances 
For the first time since April 1983 the unemployment rate has surpassed 10 percent, which translates into 16 million people without jobs.
The Labor Department announced today that the jobless rate has risen from 9.8 percent in September to 10.2 percent. There was a net loss of 190,000 jobs in October, more than economists expected.
All original content Copyright © 2010 WORLDmag.com and may not be reproduced without permission
Click to Print
Include Comments
back to top42 Comments to “Unemployment above 10%”
Unofficially in our area, “sources” suspect it is closer to 20%.
How’s that for hedging a bet?
I don’t know if that possible percentage includes the illegal aliens, but that’s another story all together.
Report comment to moderator
Michelle,
Central Ohio also reports ‘unofficial’ umemployment between 15-20%.
I believe the figure includes those whose unemployment benefits have expired, those who have given up and are no longer seeking employment, and those who have taken part-time jobs (which technically means they are not umemployed).
Report comment to moderator
What we need is another stimulus package. That’ll fix right up.
Report comment to moderator
Well, at least Congress has passed an extension of unemployment benfits. Oh wait, no, that’s socialism, isn’t it? Horrors.
Report comment to moderator
The stimulus is working exactly as the textbook said it would. Unfortunately, the stimulus is half as large as the textbook says it needs to be.
Report comment to moderator
Just think, Scroop. Perhaps with a larger stimulus, we could have had even more unemployment. It boggles the mind.
Report comment to moderator
Admit it, RR, you’re very disappointed that we haven’t plunged into a barter economy where your gold coins would make you rich as Croesus.
Report comment to moderator
We can only imagine what significant tax cuts would have done to encourage growth in our economy, and specifically the creation of jobs. History gives us a good clue, but oh, that’s right some political/economic theorists say it would have been harmful. It is true that it would have been harmful to the growth of government bureaucracy.
Report comment to moderator
Just wait until Obama finishes taken over the health care and is spreading the lie this will help the Unemployed people. He will move on other issues like taken over big oil, while the more people find them selves with out jobs, he well tell people this will help the Unemployed people.
Very sad folks, very sad, this is the change you get when puttig someone like Obama in power.
Report comment to moderator
#5 Scroop “The stimulus is working exactly as the textbook said it would.”
Yup. It was a massive redistribution of wealth from the private sector to the public sector. Job numbers continue to decline. And liberals continue sing the praises of their Messiah. Just like the textbook says.
Report comment to moderator
From back in February:
Republicans and other critics, however, have something less than admiration for the $819 billion plan that passed without a single GOP vote last week. They say it is loaded up with pork-barrel projects that will do little to jolt the economy.
http://www.boston.com/news/politics/politicalintelligence/2009/02/obama_rallies_d.html
Report comment to moderator
Few people can live on unemployment alone. We should pray for them because in some homes, it’s both mother and father.
Report comment to moderator
In Billings, MT, unemployment is at a below-replacement-level 4.7%. We apparently have missed the recession.
But then, we never match the national trends. Late ’80s it was terrible here, when everywhere else was doing great.
Report comment to moderator
Yup. It was a massive redistribution of wealth from the private sector to the public sector.
That’s not true. For one, taxes didn’t rise. Two, the stim merely transferred economic growth from some future quarters to the present, where we badly need it. For three, the private sector practically gave the government the funding, by buying notes at practically zero interest.
Now, to the extent that the “pork” didn’t contribute to long-term productivity (some of it will, some of it won’t) that spending won’t generate increases in revenue to pay back the debt. But even the porky pork contributes indirectly to future productivity by purchasing opportunity — the opportunity to recover. Without stimulus, the economy could have collapsed into a decade of no growth. The future prosperity of a whole generation would have been injured. Opportunity costs are sometimes the heaviest costs at all.
If pork is so bad, how come all the trillions of military spending hasn’t bankrupted the private sector?
Hope that helps.
Report comment to moderator
Scroop Moth – Obama is now setting what people can make that took his money.
Report comment to moderator
Time for the one to man up and accept responsibility for this issue.
He needs to imitate Harry S Truman and say “The Buck Stops Here!” instead of blaming, Bush, Wall Street and Fox News.
Report comment to moderator
Has anyone seen hard numbers on how many jobs were created–not saved– but created?
Report comment to moderator
Scroop, you’ve tried the military spending divide-and-conquer thing before. It still doesn’t work as a defense of pork.
Conservatives may be in favor of some military spending on the grounds that defense is one of those few current activities of the federal government that the Constitution actually mandates! But buying tanks and airplanes doesn’t stimulate, or fail to stimulate, the economy in some way distinct from hiring lots and lots of government secretaries and administrators. It gives some people jobs, and some vendors get contracts for all that aluminum or copier paper, but the actual product — what is purchased by the spending — does little to expand the economy in either case. Tanks and airplanes, unlike industrial machinery or wheat combines or new desktop software, don’t make profit-seeking people more productive, they are merely husbanded for the eventuality of war. Similarly, the product of government is only of indirect help to economic growth.
As for why it hasn’t bankrupted the economy: who says it hasn’t? Or better, who says it still won’t? Military spending, along with entitlement spending, is being financed by debt numbers so high they are almost bereft of meaning. Somebody’s going to pay for all this, now or later.
Report comment to moderator
RR – you make the surprising argument that military spendng is good for the economy because it’s permitted by the Constitution. That raises my suspicion that your opposition to government spending has little to do with the economy . . which is OK. Government spending doesn’t have to hurt the economy for you to object. You can oppose government spending because of Gal 18:43 (to pick a reference at random) or for no reason at all. This is a free country!
I’ll pass on your skepticism of the economic utility of government secretaries and administrators. (Or would you like to compare the ones at United Health with the ones at Medicare?) The apposite employe in the current debate is the schoolteacher, tens of thousands of which still go to work thanks to the stim. Is it possible, in your view of things, that employing these teachers is a smart expenditure/investment?
You ought to take another look at a graph of the debt spikes for the Depression, WWI, WWII, and Reagan-Bush. As a share of GDP, the recent Republican debt was as big as FDR’s but only a third as large as WWII. How did we ever enjoy decades of prosperity after WWII with that monster debt and 70% marginal rates on the rich? By the way, Obama so far has added only about $200B to debt held by the public (debt held by the fed doesn’t count) on top of the $11.5 trillion passed on by GWB.
Report comment to moderator
“you make the surprising argument that military spendng is good for the economy because it’s permitted by the Constitution.”
Just silly. Never said that.
Report comment to moderator
My wife has a colleague at the school for special needs children who had to take a 25% pay cut. Her husband left her and she is facing eviction and is about to loose her automobile due to fact she cannot pay the payments. They have no food in the house. My wife gathered up our groceries and got some at the church as well to take it to this poor suffering woman. I am with NJLAWYER. We should be praying for these folks and most of all putting “feet” to our prayers as well.
Report comment to moderator
16.3 million unemployed and that is the official number. That number does not include those people who have fallen off the unemployment roles due to longevity or the people who are working part time. 16.3 million people.
So you can defend President Obama until you are blue in the face and talk about how the stimulus is working like a text book example and I will continue to say you are absolutely correct. President Obama promised to redistribute the wealth……promise delivered. Obama has redistributed the wealth from the private sector that can produce jobs and income and opportunity to the government that can only produce one thing……TAXES. That is what government has to produce in order to pay for their spending. Keep using funding of the military to equate the largest redistribution of wealth in world history and soon one day when you are one of the unemployed you will see exactly what President Obama is doing. His plan is working to perfection and because so many people want to simply flock after him, he has no opposition because anybody opposed is written off as a radical.
Socialism is a very ugly thing in reality because as Margaret Thatcher said so well, “Socialism works great until you run out of other people’s money.”
Keep defending socialism by all means, I understand from speaking with Russians and Europeans and Asians all over the world that they love their utilitarian governments that gave them socialism in return for………well in return for…..nothing and less than nothing.
Report comment to moderator
Sorry.
Some conservatives do. Maybe military spending hasn’t bankrupted us yet because it’s not gonna. Which is not to say we wouldn’t have become more prosperous with less of it.
Report comment to moderator
Numbers also don’t include people like me (self-employed), though nearly all of the ones I know are earning a whole lot less than last year. Really, does anyone still think this nonsense is “working”?
Report comment to moderator
The whole thing is scary. As people keep losing their jobs they spend less and so someone else loses their job because of that and so on and so on.
Giving money to nonsensical research projects does not make jobs.
Telling states they have to come up with matching funds in a time when states are working in the red isn’t stimulus.
Oh yeah, Obama has a plan and it isn’t to give people jobs.
Report comment to moderator
Making old people get jobs because they can’t even afford to exist anymore isn’t helping the jobs situation.
If Muslims or Communists wanted to take America out, this is a good way to do it.
And by taking America out they could cause more bankruptcy world wide. Enter: the World Savior.
Report comment to moderator
I was in high school in 1983 and I remember my dad working some long hours at his sales job but beyond that things seemed relatively optimistic in my neighborhood. My dad always wondered how 90% of the population having good jobs was automatically a bad thing.
When layoffs hit our company I just put my nose to the grindstone and made myself more valuable. I would have taken a salary cut to help a few people keep their jobs but the option never came up.
Report comment to moderator
And yet, Californians keep on electing Democrats. We are getting the rewards of our voting. Our state is broke and the Governor and the legislature are going to ask us to OK another bond to pay for an update to our water system.
When I run out of money, I stop buying things. How about you?
Once again, California leads the way!
Report comment to moderator
Headline: “Unemployment above 10%”
Liberal Response: “Yeay, it’s working!”
Report comment to moderator
The fact that they are withholding numbers on how many jobs were actually created indicates that the numbers are probably embarrassingly small.
Obama’s preoccupation with healthcare reform is no excuse for non-performance on economic issues. The economy is and always was the main issue in electing him.
Report comment to moderator
This reminds me a little of the Ford/Carter economy. I went from being a teletypist, to bank clerk, to secretary, with temporary and part-time jobs in between. Then the Unemployment Office said that, under a Displaced Homemaker Program, I qualified for a program to attend drafting school. What they did not tell me was that CADD was coming soon! After a few drafting jobs, including moving to another city, I went back to college as a sociology major which led me to an internship w/a state senate and a permanent job with the NYS majority before I retired.
Odd, how a few sentences can cover so many decades of grass withering. Thank God I made it.
Report comment to moderator
Liberal response: It’s your fault that it’s not enough.
Report comment to moderator
Dear cryptic Scroop, please: Whose fault that what isn’t enough? Sorry I need so much help
Report comment to moderator
Come on now, Nana. Republicans who opposed wholesale and Blue Dogs who wanted to show they think like Republicans and wouldn’t do anything a Republican wouldn’t do.
Report comment to moderator
Aargh. Are you referring to the stimulus or military spending?
Report comment to moderator
She asked of Scroop Moth.
Report comment to moderator
“The worse things get the better off we are!”, said the Moth.
“Whatever do you mean?”, asks Nana.
“I mean nothing at all”, said the Moth. “I am a liberal moth!”
Report comment to moderator
Brilliant XION –
Tomorrow may be another rejuvenated day?
Thanks.
Report comment to moderator
#37 – Xion, that’s a good one -
Report comment to moderator
What makes a nation prosperous? When its people are prosperous. What makes a person prosper? Here’s my Four Pillars of Personal Prosperity:
1) Can-Do attitude. You can’t succeed unless you try.
2) Diligence. Slackers don’t prosper.
3) Continuous learning. Graduation is not the end of learning.
4) Trustworthiness. Don’t lie, cheat, steal; be on time; look out for the interests of others and be of useful service to them no matter who they are.
That’s 30+ years of experience talking, rooted in the Scriptures.
Government can give none of those four pillars to a person, though it can promote them. Does the Federal government currently promote them? The “stimulus” package? California State Government? Does your representative embody these four pillars?
Report comment to moderator
The worse things get the better off we are with a 6-oz. than nothing. If you don’t even know that, XION, we’ll never send you to the store.
Report comment to moderator
237 member of Congress are millionaires.
Wanna bet that as taxes skyrocket on Americans who pay them, Congressmen won’t pay more? And if they are Democrats they probably aren’t paying all their taxes now.
Report comment to moderator
back to topJoin The Conversation
You need to be a registered user of WORLDonTheWeb.com to "join the conversation."
If you are not a member yet, what are you waiting for? Register / Login Now!