Steve Liesman Responds To Zero Hedge, Says Things Aren't Good "By A Long Shot"
Steve Liesman responds to the earlier post about Emergency Unemployment Compensation. Presented without commentary.
Quick comment: I was wrong about what the program is called. Rick is right: It's emergency unemployment claims. I've reported on this number several times before (even making the same point that it's been higher than the topline continuing claims number.)
But I stand by my read of the data and disagreement with Rick, who said, "all the non-seasonally adjust numbers were much, much higher than the headlines." That's just not true.
There are three unemploment claims programs:
Continuing Claims
Extended Benefits
Emergency Unemployment Claims, which I just know as EUC.
Here are the NSA numbers from the week of Nov. 21, the latest for all three:
Continuing Claims: -299k
Extended Benefits: -190k
EUC: +327k
The net, not seasonally adjusted number, for all three changes for the week of Nov. 21 was -161,000. So it is wrong here to claim that the numbers overall are far worse. They are not. For one of the three, it is. And you can take your read from that anyway you like.
I've never claimed the improvement in claims shows hiring. The steady decline in jobless claims shows a reduction only in the pace of firing. That's all you can say. The rise in the EUC likely reflects what I reported on several times from the unemployment report last week: the long duration we see with unemployment in this recession.
5.8 million Americans have been unemployed for 27 weeks or longer, up 293K in the last report, leading to the longest avg. unemployment duration we've seen in the data, ever and by far. (Yeah, I'm so rosey I've reported this about eight times. But apparently that's more difficult to hear.)
The 5 to 14 week category, meanwhile, is down by about 800k to 3.5 million since May.
I'd be happy to have a debate but I'm not sure what's at issue. That things are bad? I don't contest it. That things are better than they were? Seems pretty plain.
Are things good? Nah, I wouldn't say so and haven't, not by a long shot.
Sincerely,
Steve Liesman or LIEsman, or LEEZMAN or whatever you like.
(5 votes)
on Fri, 12/11/2009 - 15:43
#160436
What a dooche bag
on Fri, 12/11/2009 - 15:47
#160441
It would have been better if you had just said 'first1'
on Fri, 12/11/2009 - 15:55
#160458
Did Steve Liesman contact Zero Hedge directly
or is this a standard mail shot out to all??
I'd have a bit more time for the note ,if its a direct mail to ZH.
on Fri, 12/11/2009 - 15:56
#160467
Comment #160188
http://www.zerohedge.com/article/explaining-emergency-unemployment-compe...
on Fri, 12/11/2009 - 17:03
#160611
I thought ZH was what CNBS'ers called a "digital dickweed".
Comcastic.
on Fri, 12/11/2009 - 17:39
#160635
Thx WW missed that !
Hmmm Dickweeds
That was Dennis "beaker" Kneale
I don't recall him ever responding directly on ZH.
He had his little rants on air & blew away respect along with his prime time slot!
Chase "mines a double" Gasperino played the game.
The 24 hour hand bags at 10 paces flame war was kinda fun to watch as it play out:-)
I wonder if Rick or one of the other CNBC lurkers forwarded it to Steve ?
Respect is due to Steve for the direct reply !
on Fri, 12/11/2009 - 22:08
#160905
Steve Liesman or LIEsman, or LEEZMAN or whatever you like.
I'll go with SLEEZEman
on Sat, 12/12/2009 - 09:00
#161095
Love the mug as a shout out to those that understand.
on Fri, 12/11/2009 - 15:58
#160469
Well, this is a douchebag:
http://www.kennhoekstra.com/images/humor/douchebag.jpg
on Fri, 12/11/2009 - 16:10
#160504
That picture forgot to include, And he lives in his mother's basement.
on Fri, 12/11/2009 - 19:55
#160778
That's totally his mom's basement! Nice!
on Fri, 12/11/2009 - 18:06
#160675
No douche bag description is complete until it is UrbanDictionary complete: http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=douche+bag
on Sat, 12/12/2009 - 02:55
#161032
www.hotchickswithdouchebags.com
The last word in doucheyness.
on Fri, 12/11/2009 - 16:12
#160509
Ditto!
"That things are better than they were? Seems pretty plain."
Gee whiz, Liesman, America has reached critical mass over the past ten years in the American-jobs-offshoring industry. There simply aren't that many jobs left to offshore anymore, and the resultant cascading unemployment involving support jobs is what the lost millions over the previous year were about.
Callout to Screwball on previous Liesman post: Jimmy Cayne was rumored to have parked over one trillion dollars' worth of credit derivatives offshore, which were set to be credit event triggered in the event of a Bear Stearns meltdown.
Perhaps not so stupid after all, simply completely sociopathically dishonest!
on Fri, 12/11/2009 - 16:46
#160583
LOL, can't argue with you on that. These guys are smart, no doubt about it, but that smart isn't good for us.
I never read that, thanks for the heads up.
on Sun, 12/13/2009 - 18:31
#162476
How "smart" does one have to be to have all the inside infromation you need to make a killing?
If you know your company is headed for the rocks, how much intelligence does it take to do a put? About as much as it takes to push a couple mouse clicks.
Cayne ain't smart; he's a thief with the keys to the house, because he built it, he has the alarm code because he sold them the alarm, heknows the owners are on long vacation because he had them win one, and the neighbors have the curtains drawn.
on Fri, 12/11/2009 - 20:06
#160793
Sometimes, there is no need for commentary. Liesman does it all himself in his own reply. sigh... and he gets paid to do this?
on Fri, 12/11/2009 - 15:46
#160440
Read "Too Big to Fail." Paulson chose Liesman as the channel through which to disseminate information because he is a useful idiot for the government. If Liesman ever uttered a critical comment about the Fed/Treasury, he'd be useless as tits on a hog because his source of info would dry up.
At least Santelli can think for himself and doesn't just think higher market = happier viewers = higher ratings = keep my job (a la Liesman, Bartoromo et al).
on Fri, 12/11/2009 - 16:11
#160507
Tits on a hog ARE useful, if you want to raise baby pigs. Tits on a BOAR, on the other hand, are not so useful.....
on Fri, 12/11/2009 - 16:18
#160522
They are also not a useful as tits on a nun
on Fri, 12/11/2009 - 20:07
#160794
my son, my son. please come by tonight and ask for my forgiveness.....
on Fri, 12/11/2009 - 19:04
#160727
+1 million.
This is how it works.
on Fri, 12/11/2009 - 15:51
#160451
is this guy an idiot? The unadjusted number this week was up +600K. Furthermore, Lies man how many states are reporting numbers for the EUC? 14 I belive of the 40 plus collecting benefits. So the number is already understated
on Fri, 12/11/2009 - 15:53
#160457
Such the anti RICK... debate is good though
on Fri, 12/11/2009 - 16:35
#160562
We think we've got it bad, can you imagine if you were Santelli and you had to work with these people? The man is a saint for putting up with their repeated idiocy. He probably feels like he's trapped a CNBS version of "Idiocracy," and Liesman is the rest are so fixated on the merits of Brawndo.
on Fri, 12/11/2009 - 20:50
#160840
Let's hope "Idiocracy" is not prophetic. Either all paper burns, or "Idiocracy," here we come.
on Fri, 12/11/2009 - 15:54
#160460
Baghdad Bob redux. Different person, different city, different country, same douchebag. The only question remaining isn't one of prostitution, but payment.
Related issue: What's it like to be a douchebag? Are sociopaths capable of sleeping comfortably at night, or like Goebbels, do they feel they are following a noble calling?
How are the current lies different from the lies told by the government during the Vietnam War? Then, 10s of thousands (US, millions otherwise) died to protect certain interests. How many will (eventually) die due to the misguided policies promoted by their paid shills?
on Sat, 12/12/2009 - 10:17
#161131
thnx, now I know why this feels familiar.....watching virtually 10 years of lies by the govt during the Vietnam War.
HOWEVER, at that time, the MSM was showing much of the truth..........not like today,, when they are complicit in the lies.
on Fri, 12/11/2009 - 16:03
#160485
Don't feed the troll. If Steve is responding he must be on his journalistic death bed similar to the other temp-troll Dennis Kneale
on Fri, 12/11/2009 - 16:15
#160518
I agree and disagree. Yes let him rot. But if he were willing to post on here say after a big number like employment or retail sales, it would be great to pepper him with questions about why and how he's always spinning the data to look better than expected.
It's not likely nor necessary but it could be fun reading.
on Fri, 12/11/2009 - 16:26
#160535
No sense in giving the traitorous clown another soap box. Let him fade away into comcast late nite infomercials or something more fitting for his persona.
on Fri, 12/11/2009 - 16:04
#160488
If he had reported on it as recently as a month ago (he did, there's a clip), how did he forget it enough to argue so strongly against its existence? Is he lying, a retard or, in my opinion, the adult Nelson Muntz*? *= Simpsons reference.
on Fri, 12/11/2009 - 21:59
#160898
if that post to ZH was stevieo .. his on air exchange with santellli just shows what a dooche he is .. EUC as he knows it my ass ...
on Fri, 12/11/2009 - 16:10
#160503
The tone is his for sure.
on Fri, 12/11/2009 - 16:12
#160510
Hey Rick - how bout a guest post? Since it is painfully obvious you read ZH.
Hey Steve - take this link and read it daily http://www.zerohedge.com/ it could only help.
on Fri, 12/11/2009 - 20:08
#160796
that's right santelli. why not a guest post on zerohedge....
on Fri, 12/11/2009 - 16:12
#160511
Fair enough.
on Fri, 12/11/2009 - 16:13
#160514
kudos zerohedge, you're bad you're nationwide
man, why would he care what anyone says
on Fri, 12/11/2009 - 16:17
#160520
He looks much better with the bag on his head.
on Fri, 12/11/2009 - 16:20
#160529
Saying that a decrease in continuing claims is 'positive' news is presumptuous.
Steve, let me break this down for you: Decrease in continiuing claims does not mean increased employment. It could mean that now they're jobless & have no money coming in.
So, thanks for 'netting' the numbers for us and presenting us with a meaningless statistic.
Kinda like the hearing problem you had with the number Rick was trying to tell about emergency filings... the number that came out yesterday. Practice what you preach.
on Fri, 12/11/2009 - 16:20
#160530
I swear this guy works for the Fed/US Government.
on Fri, 12/11/2009 - 17:01
#160609
The day HR 1207, the audit the Fed bill passed out of committee he was on every single CNBC show with the same pro-FED talking points. It really was pathetic to see. He isn't stupid, but he sure thinks his audience is, that is for sure.
on Fri, 12/11/2009 - 16:23
#160531
I just think SL is worried about appearing overtly clueless as opposed to being covertly clueless. SL is routinely in the company of even dimmer wits such as JK and CQ and BQ.
Does anyone else see Comcast selling off CNBC to Fox (leading to the cancelation of the Fox Biz Channel)? I mean, the complete cast of buffoons at CNBC are right up there in blatant lies and partisan BS compared to their counterparts at Fixed Noise.
on Fri, 12/11/2009 - 16:31
#160556
If anything, there is definitely over-capacity in the "financial news" space. At least, there is over-capacity of the falsehoods and propaganda they are selling.
on Fri, 12/11/2009 - 16:27
#160540
So... is LIEsman saying this only the Internet or is he going to go on live TV during a critical 'prime time' employment report to report on all the real numbers, including the unadjusted ones? Remember, a sin of omission is equal to a lie, as both are dishonest.
Hey Steve Liesman, best remedy for you is to report on all the numbers during next week's unemployment report during the live morning TV broadcast.
on Fri, 12/11/2009 - 16:28
#160542
Tyler, please respond to Liesman and point out that the non-seasonally adjusted number from this week's report (which Rick was referring to) was +591,085 on state continuing claims and +204,703 on initials.
Rick was NOT referencing the specific week (initials on Dec 5, state continuing on Nov. 28, and Federal continuing claims on Nov 21). He was referring to yesterday's report. Steve seemed to miss this point.
Rick was making two separate points and Steve still doesn't get it. First, the unadjusted number from yesterday's report were significantly higher on initials and State continuing. Second, the EUC exploded higher.
By the way, someone should point out to Steve that we are now at an ALL-TIME HIGH on total continuing claims, moving above 10 million for the first time ever.
on Fri, 12/11/2009 - 16:28
#160545
Well, I will be happier when the crew of CNBS is added to the list of the unemployed. You may get a chance to learn what EUC is first-hand. Good luck, Mr. Liesman (the anagram generator is really not kind to you), useful idiots will probably be needed somewhere in the future. The pay will probably suck, though. You know, deflation and all.
on Fri, 12/11/2009 - 16:29
#160550
I think its admirable that Steve responded to this blog. He could have simply ignored it. I wish folks would be a little more civil and stick to intelligent debate and put away the tin foil hat every now and then.
on Fri, 12/11/2009 - 16:38
#160568
I happen to agree, I have more respect for people who take the time to respond directly ( tin hat alreay on)! :) I wonder if MCC(s) will ever take the time ? I bet Ms Drury would :-)
on Fri, 12/11/2009 - 16:42
#160576
It's too risky to ever take it off. I got lucky - I recently found out I had the shiny side facing in, not out. Saved!
on Fri, 12/11/2009 - 16:47
#160585
+1^e Fazzie. The man responded...give him that respect. Argue against his premises and his conclusions. Do not erect strawman and red herring arguments to attack him. It greatly diminishes the folks slamming him and diminishes ZH overall.
-Michael
on Fri, 12/11/2009 - 17:00
#160608
Well said Michael.
on Fri, 12/11/2009 - 17:14
#160625
Agree Michael If people take the time to respond or contribute it should be respected. Steve has a role to fill at cnbc.Who knows what kind of remit he's has to work with. Would any of us really be that different?
on Sat, 12/12/2009 - 11:15
#161163
I find it ironic that the person who defends Liesman and his lack of number sense uses the symbol +1^e. It still equals one, buddy. If the base is 1, your exponent doesn't matter.
on Fri, 12/11/2009 - 16:55
#160598
I like that he responded too but it's funny you mention being civil because the video in question shows him acting like an 11 year old.
As for the tin hat, guys like Leisman could help a great deal in this area if they didn't try to spin data as soon as they reported it and instead analysed it and made the appropriate comments.
This morning for example, he could have said something about this blurb (below) when reporting the retail sales number:
Special Notice - Beginning with the December 11, 2009 release for November 2009, estimates in the Advance Monthly Retail Trade Survey release will be based on a new sample. For further information on the 2009 MARTS sample revision, please see the following PDF.
Maybe he could take that info and connect it to the all day shut in the RLX on 12/3, and investigate how bad the retail sector really is instead of towing the line.
on Fri, 12/11/2009 - 17:08
#160617
As for the tin hat, guys like Leisman could help a great deal in this area if they didn't try to spin data as soon as they reported it and instead analysed it and made the appropriate comments.
While I agree with this, I don't think they have a choice. They want ratings just like anyone else, and it's possible the producers and business model forces them to do as they are told, rather they like it or not. These people are not stupid, they have to know the real truth. While it pisses us off listening to the spin (I bash them all the time too) if they were to tell the real truth they probably would be out of a job.
After the famous Santell Rant about the tea party stuff, I have to believe he got his pecker whacked. He was pretty tame for a while and hasn't done that since. Perhaps, they have a very difficult job. It can't be easy to spin anything and everything, especially in the tiime allotted, as well as having somebody yelling in their ear piece.
I remember the interview with Kudlow, Missy Francis and Paul Wilmott. That guy had no business doing an interview on CNBC. I highly doubt more than 5 percent of the audience had a clue what he was talking about, and Kudlow and Francis sure didn't. I blame that on the producers for setting up the interview to begin with.
That said, when it comes to Cramer, and the Fast Money pumpers, telling people to buy stocks and what to buy, all bets are off.
If that was really you Steve, you have a hat tip from me.
on Fri, 12/11/2009 - 17:18
#160634
I'm not saying any of them have to tell it exactly like it is, just don't defend every "data" point as if it were your own.
on Fri, 12/11/2009 - 17:29
#160643
Agreed Dixie. It's getting close to Christmas and I was giving him a little cheer. He does tend to do that, good point.
on Fri, 12/11/2009 - 17:00
#160607
Steve needs to respond to the audience he misled, the CNBC audience, no one here believes a word he says anyway, he is just trolling for attention/viewers.
on Fri, 12/11/2009 - 17:10
#160619
John I agree
on Fri, 12/11/2009 - 17:09
#160618
Civil? Let me understand this. Unemployment is 21.8% (www.shadowstats.com) and this has YET to be blurted out on this shill cable show.
Dude, 21.8% whether you know it or not is a depressonairy indicator and these morons are saying things are getting better?
That could be your Mom or Dad investing again based on utter and absolute BS.
These shills are morons and shouldn't be allowed to be on TV. Think Dennis Kneale here.
on Fri, 12/11/2009 - 23:07
#160949
+1. Completely agree with you. I'm sick of hearing that the economy is "recovering" or that the numbers are "less worse". Problem is, the only people who no longer believe this shit are unemployed and hurting badly. Most others are happy to remain ignorant....and I'll tell you.....ignorance may be bliss.
on Fri, 12/11/2009 - 17:11
#160621
IF IT TALKS LIKE A MORON IT IS A MORON! Unemployment is 21.8% and f*ck the seasonal adjustments alone, he isn't looking at the birth death model which uses 12 month lagging statistics or the discouraged workers or u3+u4+u5+u6. We should chip in and buy him a subscription to www.shadowstats.com and a mirror and a light so he can find his ass with both hands.
on Fri, 12/11/2009 - 17:18
#160631
Hellooooooo Mr. Liesman!!!!
on Sat, 12/12/2009 - 04:05
#161045
Personal abuse reflects badly on the poster in my opinion.
Play the ball and not the man.
(or woman)
on Sat, 12/12/2009 - 08:54
#161094
I concur, Steve starts his comment with "I was wrong"
follows with "stand by my comments" and at no point did he malign any Zero Hedgers.
We should invite Steve over for a virtual beer and real discussion, perhaps introduce him to Marla?
on Sat, 12/12/2009 - 18:52
#161550
+1
on Fri, 12/11/2009 - 16:30
#160554
Dementia can start as early as 40 for some folks.
on Fri, 12/11/2009 - 16:33
#160558
I don't know whether his response was to ZH directly but at least give credit to him for responding.
I don't agree with what he says generally about the markets. Maybe - like Kneale? - he's toeing the channel's line, or maybe he really believes what he's saying (and there are enough of the 'Recovery is under way' brigade to make me wonder whether I'm missing something by being so bearish). However, credit where it's due.
There is another aspect to reading or hearing things we disagree with. If it makes us THINK that's a good thing.
DavidC
on Fri, 12/11/2009 - 16:41
#160570
You can't have Liesman without lies.
on Fri, 12/11/2009 - 16:48
#160587
That's bad karma. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y8-1LP1db8w
on Fri, 12/11/2009 - 16:57
#160602
hey, in New York they had continuing claims and people were not getting the unemployment insurance benefits in advance of the recent extension.
this happened during sept, october up to mid november when benefits kicked in again.
on Fri, 12/11/2009 - 17:05
#160613
IF IT TALKS LIKE A MORON IT IS A MORON! Unemployment is 21.8% and f*ck the seasonal adjustments alone, he isn't looking at the birth death model which uses 12 month lagging statistics or the discouraged workers or u3+u4+u5+u6. We should chip in and buy him a subscription to www.shadowstats.com and a mirror and a light so he can find his ass with both hands.
on Fri, 12/11/2009 - 17:05
#160614
I do not even believe the government numbers, so i cant even get into the analysis of them lol.
on Fri, 12/11/2009 - 17:06
#160615
"Quick comment: I was wrong about what the program is called. Rick is right:"
The point is someone who deserves respect would have stopped at the end of the above. After that, Lie man is just another sop who is rationalizing and backpeddaling. When the man can just say, "I was wrong.", he will become wiser and not just intellectually smart.
on Fri, 12/11/2009 - 17:16
#160630
well put.
that he goes on the say he knows the number as "EUC" and not "Emergency Unemployment Claims" really shows you the bubble he lives in.
Steve, you can lie to yourself and you can lie to most of your CNBC audience, but you can't lie to Zero Hedge. meanwhile he's right now patting himself on the back for saving his credibility... clueless.
on Sat, 12/12/2009 - 11:33
#161177
Exactly! What on earth is he doing there reporting this stuff if he does not even know what it means?
on Fri, 12/11/2009 - 17:11
#160620
If he was smart, he would have stopped with, "Quick comment: I was wrong about what the program is called. Rick is right: It's emergency unemployment claims."
By rationalizing and whining he invites well desrved scorn and contempt. If you are reading any of this Liesman, cowboy up and go on the air tomorrow and say, "I was wrong. Rick was right." And that's all. That would engender respect.
on Fri, 12/11/2009 - 17:11
#160622
Liesman's last big "you must be kidding me" moment with Santelli was when he adamantly denied the FHA was taking huge losses on loans.
He essentially called Santelli a liar and that he'd be back with data proving his point exactly 24 hours later. Said something like "Santelli, I'll prove it to you right here at 8:40am TOMORROW!"... next day comes, and nothing... still nothing a month+ later...
"CNBC Senior Economist".... how fitting. they deserve each other.
on Fri, 12/11/2009 - 17:12
#160624
Ad hominem attacks are replete with logical pitfalls. For example, people characterize Jews as an inferior morally corrupt race, that run everything. The logical fallacy is an inferior race dominating a superior race.
Steve Liesman is characterized as a bumbling buffoon in one paragraph while conceding he is the propaganda master of a grand conspiracy in the next.
ZH itself has put its cyber-foot in its mouth many times,often by jumping the gun. That dosent mean ZH is just a bunch of hot headed nutjobs.
Now all that said, CNBC, IMO, definately tends to see the glass half-full most of the time,or at least "fuller than expected!"
on Fri, 12/11/2009 - 18:06
#160654
Woah, careful swinging that logic around here.
Since when is Liesman a propaganda master? He comes up with his own stuff as much as the Prez. If he's a liar it ain't ad hominem. He justs lies, that's all. And like the Prez, I don't respect people that lie - they get the door and a copy of 'Resumes for Dummies'. But these liars are not in a vacuum - the fate of the Nation is at stake. Calling the current tension, fraud, war, etc the stuff of conspiracy theory is a logical fallacy - it's conspiracy fact - you're hiding under a rock if you can't see the corruption and collusion.
The question would be: Are they so out of touch they don't know they are passing on lies, or are they just narcissistic psychopaths? Or is that a logical fallacy?
The problem with the People is that they aren't angry enough! Bernanke gets a verbal whipping: so what. We vote the bums out, new bums come in. Rinse, repeat. You're still a slave - congratulations!
on Fri, 12/11/2009 - 17:14
#160627
The raw data is at http://www.dol.gov/opa/media/press/eta/ui/current.htm.
Liesman's numbers are correct for the time period between November 14 and November 21. I'll explain where he got his numbers then point out something interesting.
The "EUC" number is at the bottom of the chart where it says "+327,729".
The "Extended Benefits" number is directly above that number, where it says "-190,233".
To get the "Continuing Claims" number, look at the line labeled "Ins. Unemployment (NSA)". The relevant numbers are in the columns labeled "Nov. 14" and "Nov. 21" and are "5,082,476" and "4,782,786" respectively. Subtracting the former from the latter gives 4782786 - 5082476 = -299690, which is the number Liesman gives.
---------------------------
Now here's the interesting thing: Look at the column labeled "Advance Nov. 28" which has the figure "5,373,871". If we repeat the calculation above with next week's numbers we get 5373871 - 4782786 = 591085, which is the number given in the column labeled "Change".
In other words, if Liesman had looked at next week's numbers he would have seen 591085 instead of -299690 and his argument would go like this:
Continuing Claims: +591k (note the huge change)
Extended Benefits: -190k
EUC: +327k
Instead of
"The net, not seasonally adjusted number, for all three changes for the week of Nov. 21 was -161,000,"
he would have said
"The net, not seasonally adjusted number, for all three changes for the week of Nov. 28 will be +728,581."
Of course, I'm still using the Nov. 14-21 numbers for "Extended Benefits" and "EUC" instead of the Nov. 21-28 numbers; perhaps these will go proportionally down (lol).
on Fri, 12/11/2009 - 17:18
#160633
I think the message here is that L man has taken notice of ZH.
Wise decision on his part imo.
on Fri, 12/11/2009 - 17:29
#160645
I disagree with the wise part, from a public relations standpoint.
MSMs usual tactic of marginalizing the blogosphere as the populist rantings of irrational self appointed jouralists has served them well.
In fact, an anonymous post claiming to be the Liesman himself is a bit suspect in itself, hopefully TD and the gang have verified its source.
on Fri, 12/11/2009 - 18:01
#160669
Distrust but verify.
on Fri, 12/11/2009 - 17:39
#160653
Taken Notice???
It might have been the your a f*cking idiot email with the link to this thread that I sent the momo.
on Fri, 12/11/2009 - 17:20
#160636
Steve,
Tax data does not support NSA job gains, neither does ADP
http://anonymousmonetarist.blogspot.com/2009/12/great-depression-no-great-deception.html
King Report:
Despite tax data that shows hefty declines, the past three months have shown enormous jobs gains NSA versus 2008. According to the BLS, 1.177 million jobs NSA were created over the past three months versus a loss of 120,000 jobs for the same period in 2008, a job gain of ~1.3 million jobs y/y!?!?!
ADP, which actually counts jobs, shows a loss of 169k for November. There is now about a 4.6m job discrepancy since January 2008 between ADP’s job count, which shows ~2.8m losses and the BLS, which shows about 1.8 million jobs created…PS - NSA jobs are supposed to pay real taxes; SA jobs do not.
November 2009 (FY 2010) withheld income & employment taxes are: $271,591 million (FY to date)minus $19,186 (Dec.) minus $135, 328 (Oct) or $117,077 million.
November 2008 (FY 2009) withheld income & employment taxes are $144,782 (million); November 2009 (FY 2010) taxes are down 19.14% or $27.7B!!! Do you still believe the NFP number?
on Fri, 12/11/2009 - 17:26
#160641
Steve
Shadowstats at 21%+, still isn't as broad as the metric used to measure unemployment during the Great Depression. During the First Great Depression the Unemployment Rate peaked at 23.53% in 1932, 24.75% in 1933 and 21.6% in 1934.
A broader 'de facto' rate confirms it most certainly is a Great Depression
http://anonymousmonetarist.blogspot.com/2009/12/kids-say-damnedest-things.html
Center for Working-Class Studies at Youngstown State University
It speaks for itself: the first column represents 12/07 and the second column represents 12/09.
DE-FACTO UNEMPLOYMENT RATE
Officially Unemployed 4.9%, 10.0%
Marginally Attached .8%, 1.5%
Discouraged 02%, .05%
Underemployed 3.1%, 6.0%
Excess disability 6.0%, 6.0%
Government programs 4.0%, 4.0%
Subtotal 18.52%, 28.35%
on Fri, 12/11/2009 - 17:43
#160656
Good info and good read, thank you!
PS Inflation on shadowstats is 7.8% so it isn't down like Stevey said. What numbers do you have on that? (since the above info rocks)
on Fri, 12/11/2009 - 17:53
#160664
Nothing superior to shadowstats.
on Fri, 12/11/2009 - 17:26
#160642
He said he'd be happy for a debate so give him credit. The real question, as I see it, is which CNBC talking head responds next?
on Fri, 12/11/2009 - 17:29
#160644
Steve,
I triple dog dare you to cover either of the bits above.
If you do, will get a bud to facepie Rick on the air.
Thank you drive through...
on Fri, 12/11/2009 - 17:32
#160646
And if security won't let the pie through..
will run down Lasalle in my skivvies with a sign saying Steve Liesman is a GOD
on Fri, 12/11/2009 - 17:35
#160647
You have a tag Steve Liesman?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S3C82Q5I80U
on Fri, 12/11/2009 - 17:37
#160650
Karl Denninger said it well http://market-ticker.denninger.net/archives/1722-Steve-LIESman-Gets-Skewered.html
on Fri, 12/11/2009 - 18:01
#160668
Acting as a mouthpiece for untruths corrupts the soul no matter what the reason or rationale.
It is the Price for that activity.
on Fri, 12/11/2009 - 18:15
#160680
Do you want to debate him on anything? He has offered to do this. Perhaps Tyler and them are already on this. But if you stay disorganized you might miss an opportunity.
There are some posts on this thread, that, if he is reading, he should be troubled. If he is bought off, the whole thing is hopeless. But what if he has never had anyone carefully lay out the case for him that the stats as reported by the government are consistently tampered with?
We have talked a lot on this blog about how the psychology of prior investment can serve to keep someone lodged in denial a bit longer than if they were not so invested? I'm just saying, this could be an opportunity.
DEBATE. At The Debate Society (also known as Fight Club, bitchez). If he were to agree, what should the topic specifically be? And should he debate Marla, or Tyler? He will have a whole herd of assistants helping him craft his comments, but that's okay.
If he just jumps into the comments section here, there will be no order to it at all.
on Fri, 12/11/2009 - 18:38
#160701
Dear McCreant:
You just broke Rules One and Two of Fight Club :-))
on Fri, 12/11/2009 - 18:40
#160702
And by the way, Tyler is a lightweight compared to Marla.
on Fri, 12/11/2009 - 18:40
#160704
Growing up in gold country, I learned early that when the claims thin, and the nuggets dry up, and only a daily gold dust's worth of survival makes the daily appearance, Boom town is a Bust town.
Manufacturing, dust only. Technology, dust only. Housing and Commercial real estate, dust only.
There is nothing left but the coin clippers to counterfeit so's that the money is what they say it is.
You don't want to be in the middle of a turf war between big banks and sovereigns.
You don't want to venture anything valuable when the last 7 years were state sponsored fraud and graft.
The only money will be for the parlour hall owners, the whores, the muscle, and the few hangers on.
Time to pull up stakes.
on Fri, 12/11/2009 - 18:55
#160716
Ya gotta give Steve props for responding to ZH, although he also looked real bad responding to Rick this morning. maybe, Maybe, JUST MAYBE, Steve is this stupid and just doesn't get it. In this case we should be kind and gentle with this mentally challenged but well meaning man-child. But if he is smart and willfully misrepresenting the picture to whatever his corporate or political glorious leader wants, we should still be thankful that they hired such a natural clutz to try and get the message out.
on Fri, 12/11/2009 - 18:59
#160721
Hey, here is a link to liesman explaining EUC just a month ago.
http://www.cnbc.com/id/15840232?video=1316705868&play=1
on Fri, 12/11/2009 - 19:35
#160754
Maybe someone already asked the question, but how do we know it was really SL who posted??
on Fri, 12/11/2009 - 19:53
#160775
If he denies it, should we believe him?
on Fri, 12/11/2009 - 21:15
#160862
That would be me and yes obviously before we tear apart Steves rebuttal, we should be certain that its really the Steve Liesman.
It seems for real, as the style is similar to his ramblings on the air, just a little better thought out.
TD has apparently vouched for its authenticity so maybe he just called him on the cell and chatted up a bit!
Steves ringtone, of course is a nervous robotic voice that repeats "Better than expected" over and over again.
on Fri, 12/11/2009 - 21:52
#160891
Hee-haw! Nice ringtone. It's a 99.9% chance it was his post. Who, in their right mind, would post something that long and sophisticated if they were posing? If it wasn't him it was some CNBC staffer trying to put out a fire.
on Fri, 12/11/2009 - 20:00
#160787
Steve if you are reading these comments here is one just for you. Go Fuck Yourself!
on Fri, 12/11/2009 - 20:25
#160815
I say, "Join us, Steve". Otherwise, we will send you back to infect the CNBC/Borg collective.
on Fri, 12/11/2009 - 21:01
#160852
"Join us Steve"....."Join us"....etc..
Not that we have a cult mentality or anything.
Whats next, a special initiation ceremony where "we" present him with a special tin foil hat?
on Fri, 12/11/2009 - 20:18
#160808
Baghdad Bob had much jazzier clothes and that bombastic brio was boss.
Liesman on the other hand would have a hard time making Tiger's double blowgie trysts seem the slightest bit intriguing.
I'd like to see a charity boxing match between Rick "The Rant" Santelli vs Steve "The Snooze". You can see visceral distaste on Santelli's face and the little balloon over his head. "You fucking dullardly dough boy. I'll hit you so hard your capped teeth'll come marching out of your fat ass like toy soldiers."
Cramer announces...Kudlow in Liesman's corner. Robot Trader supplies the round card girls. I think this has possibilities.
on Fri, 12/11/2009 - 21:54
#160892
Dammit I missed him! Did Steve say anything about me? Shit. I wanted to ask him how Satan was doing.
on Fri, 12/11/2009 - 22:56
#160943
You win the gdmn prize. Ga-zing!
on Fri, 12/11/2009 - 22:24
#160920
Please lets behave lets rational people!
Liesman is nothing but a messenger. Do not hang the messenger!! Yes, he is feeding us lies and propaganda but he is still doing nothing but his job.
Who among us critics has sacrificed our jobs lately for the sake of truth and justice? If you have, throw all the stones you like, if you haven’t, shut your noise hole.
We are not in the position we are because of men like Liesmen, we are because we have done nothing, despite better judgement. We have all known, but done nothing.
If this was posted by Liesman it represents a desperate post by a desperate man. If he posted that post than I applaud his courage, because it could quickly create his demise and he would know it.
I am a senior researcher who has known of this coming collapse for years yet I could do nothing.
Why?
Because I had to choose between you people and my children.
Forgive me for my lack of courage.
Things are about to get much worse, prepare for it.
If there is anything to "our" movement than talk, then I will step forward when the time is right.
Until then your fate is your own.
Act, and you will have my allegiance
on Fri, 12/11/2009 - 23:09
#160954
Who's behaving irrational here? I hear pissed off people blowing off steam. What the fuck are you talking about?
on Fri, 12/11/2009 - 23:22
#160961
I have peacefully protested, written/called/faxed congress to no avail. I recall that the sheeple did the same 300:1 against the TARP and it meant nothing.
If I were in a position requiring me to lie to innocent people I would leave the position. I know because I left a high paying job when my principles were compromised.
I believe we are in this situation because our government consists of cowards and liars.
on Fri, 12/11/2009 - 22:30
#160924
I respect him if it was him for responding. Now the rest of you asshats that have nothing constructive to offer fuck off. If his analysis is wrong it's wrong the personal attacks are unwarrented and pedestrian. I think I'll stick to the main content from now on and avoid all the tinfoil in the comments section. It's the same shit different day.
on Sat, 12/12/2009 - 04:36
#161051
constructive? I constructed my own foil hat, thank you!
on Fri, 12/11/2009 - 23:09
#160953
Lies-Man will say whatever his handlers want him to say. He's a puppet with no intellectual substance. He's the modern day Baghdad Bob.
on Fri, 12/11/2009 - 23:38
#160973
Pardon me, but hold on a fucking second.
Put aside all the CNBC and Liesman trashing and consider his statement:
"Emergency Unemployment Claims, which I just know as EUC."
which I just know as EUC.
WHAT THE FUCK DID HE THINK THE ACRONYM STOOD FOR?? THIS IS A FUCKING ECONOMIST!!!!! THAT IS PAID TO ANALYZE THE DATA.
It's one thing for the pufferists to skew the data in their favor. It is quite another for a paid fucking ECONOMIST! not to even know a central part of the UE picture and not even know what it refers to.
That's like an astronaut not knowing what NASA stands for or a statistician not understanding what MSA stands for.
WHAT THE FUCK KIND OF CLOWN SHOW ARE THEY PUTTING ON OVER THERE. At least lie to me with somebody who knows what the fuck they are talking about.
I find it very insulting that we can't even get a goofball that actually knows what the fuck he is talking about to spew the party line. This is not some goofy World Bank special funding acronym. IT IS A BIG PART OF THE FUCKING UNEMPLOYMENT DATA.
And yes, there's a lot of cursing in this post for two reasons: 1) I am insulted; and 2) why is this guy still getting paid, is it customary to read fucking reports and not know what key shit in those reports is????
Prescient11
on Sat, 12/12/2009 - 08:33
#161086
CNBC refers to Steve Liesman as their "senior economics reporter", which I think leaves a lot of people with the mistaken idea that he's an economist. His bio says he has a BA in English and and MS in Journalism.
Does journalism school still teach that reporters should be skeptical by nature and play something of an adversary role with institutions such as government and business to serve the public interest? What Liesman does on CNBC by being a parrot for the Fed and Treasury is closer to public relations than to journalism.
on Sat, 12/12/2009 - 10:31
#161136
Thanks for that clarification. But even if not an economist, you think a guy who is suppose to "analyze" UE data every month would know what the key data points would be.
That's pretty sad.
And I kind of like Liesman, he's kinda funny and I don't think a bad guy.
on Fri, 12/11/2009 - 23:54
#160981
I think that most of you forget the influence that YOU are capable of exerting. Let me suggest that over the following weeks that you people watch the subtle influence that you can and will exert on him. He obviously has discovered and is reading Zero Hedge. The general overall consensus and logic of the more rational and cogent arguments WILL begin to influence and affect him. He may be easy to make fun of, but he wouldn't be where he is today if he was unintellegent. Just because you are intellegent doesn't mean that you do not or cannot be wrong or mistaken sometimes.
Step up to the plate, all you readers of this site. This is a man working in what you call Main Street Media (MSM). Bring him on side, (by engaging him in a meaningfull and respectable dialogue) and present him with facts.
Imagine and then act. If your country is to rebuild after the inevitable crash, you need to co-opt every resource you can.
I have heard MANY opinions denigrating this guy. They are probably hurtfull to the guy and do not contribute at all to finding solutions to the ENORMUS problems that face every man,woman,and child in your country. There is a much smaller subset who are (like me) capable of recognizing another who we think is mistaken in his (or her) beliefs, but is not any less intellegent than we are.
Convince this guy. He can help. He is not the ultimate solution anymore that you or I are. But he certainly can be a another part of the solution. And ultimately, IF you are to succeed in rebuilding after your crash, you NEED people from every spectrum of life in your country to make it happen. And that most definitely is one or more people from MSM.
Start, in every way you can people, working on helping to provide the solutions to the serious problems that face your country.
Wish I could end on a positive, uplifting note.
Sorry.
on Sat, 12/12/2009 - 00:13
#160988
First of all, it's Main STREAM Media. Secondly, you need to learn what "co-opt" really means. Finally, I already have a pet. I don't need to waste my time grooming Steve Leisman.
on Sat, 12/12/2009 - 14:33
#161338
I really am amazed at the comments today. When did so many people on ZH come out in favor of Liesman? A regular ZH reader has seen Liesman make a fool out himself time and time again. From my viewing experience, he does not come across as intelligent or helpful - he's an aggressive supporter of the Establishment. Out of all their regular personalities he is the only one I will not watch.
on Sat, 12/12/2009 - 01:07
#161001
Hey Steve Liesman, Rick Santelli, or any of you other CNBCers...how about a half hour special, not about the porn industry (I have nothing against the porn industry btw, ok...I like the porn industry a lot) but rather a special about the blatant manipulation of the gold and silver markets? Now that would be groundbreaking. There is nothing left open to debate on this issue. The facts speak for themselves. The numbers don't lie. A special such as this might also impress Mr. Roberts, your new boss. You can start the ball rolling by contacting Ted Butler. He's already done all the work and would probably be elated to share his years of research and his findings.
on Sat, 12/12/2009 - 01:14
#161003
It is not the thoughts in our minds that will
influence SL. It is how he thinks. So he should
ask himself, "What is job security before and
after the event?" If he is seen as someone
who helped cause our downfall, will he have
a job?
on Sat, 12/12/2009 - 01:17
#161005
No shit. Santelli "co-opts" the outrage while Liesman plays Oliver Hardy. Brought to you by Taco Bell.
on Sat, 12/12/2009 - 02:53
#161031
"Carl's Jr"
FTFY....
on Sat, 12/12/2009 - 02:56
#161028
DOW/SP500 etc. charts are also very helpful.
Don't forget the stock market is a LEADING INDICATOR.
It warned us what was going to happen back in 2007 when it started to roll over !
It tells us what the economy is going to do - it sees into the future - and more analysts should consider that.
http://www.zerohedge.com/forum/market-outlook-0
on Sat, 12/12/2009 - 03:23
#161037
That was not quick...Steve can't you stop lying even in the redundant introductions of your comments?
on Sat, 12/12/2009 - 04:06
#161046
Personal abuse reflects badly on the poster in my opinion.
Play the ball and not the man.
(or woman)
on Sat, 12/12/2009 - 09:26
#161104
Wow, you said something relevant to this post. You so come off like spam when you post about the dollar rally on EVERY THREAD.
on Sat, 12/12/2009 - 07:50
#161079
+1000
on Sat, 12/12/2009 - 09:46
#161113
I told my wife that for Christmas I want a ring-side seat of Steve Liesman and WALSTREETPRO2 going toe-to-toe. And some of Tigers girls walking the round cards.
on Sat, 12/12/2009 - 10:17
#161132
Hey LIESman--
Thanks for your post, but doesn't it get old being OWNED by Wall Street, instead of telling the people the truth that you see everyday on the ground?? The manipulation of the numbers is off the charts, and you know that.
Life is short, buddy. Don't waste yours by being a ball boy for the crooks. Pull a Dylan Ratigan and GTFO of that cesspool you operate in! Come toward the LIGHT........
Love,
Jan
on Sat, 12/12/2009 - 15:59
#161409
So Tim Geithner gets held up jogging on the Mall in DC and the robber jumps out, menacing and sez "give me your All your money sonny"
Svelt and pucky Tim after sizing up the make of the piece and the stance, sez--"Do you know who I am? You twip. I used to be head of the New York Federal Reserve and am The Secretary of The Treasury" (finger wag)
Robber: in that case you little hobbit like weirdo give me My Money Back"!!!!
on Sat, 12/12/2009 - 17:49
#161508
Nielson discusses three things of note:
-- The latest BLS job number was unadulterated BS
-- He continues to like gold despite recent sell off
-- Treasury stalled the Annual 2009 Budget Report, required by law, no doubt because they want to hide the real deficit -- around $9 Trillion (best guess, John William's of Shadowstats)
-----------------------
Gold Bruised by U.S. Jobs Propaganda
December 5, 2009
I typically keep my commentaries on precious metals and the broader economy somewhat separate, so those readers who only read my work on precious metals may not be familiar with my specific views on the monthly, fraudulent jobs reports from the Bureau of Labor Statistics.
To be succinct, they don't have the slightest connection to reality. These are not simply implausible estimates, but rather deliberate falsifications of data. The evidence for this conclusion is clear: the numbers from the weekly report on payroll lay-offs. Years of this data have produced predictable patterns between the number of weekly lay-offs and net monthly job losses.
When U.S. weekly lay-offs exceed 300,000 workers (for a total of roughly 1.3 million jobs per month), this has been the tipping point to when the U.S. begins to experience net, monthly job losses. Hiring and lay-offs move in an inverse manner to each other, not surprisingly. If lay-offs are rising, then hiring is falling (and vice versa). Thus when lay-offs reach 400,000 per week (roughly 1.8 million for the month), this means net monthly job losses must be in excess of 500,000 jobs. This represents an extra half-million lay-offs plus the greater disparity caused by the fall in hiring.
Similarly, when lay-offs exceed 500,000 per week (2.2 million lay-offs for the month), net monthly job losses must be well over 1 million jobs per month. U.S. weekly lay-offs for November totalled roughly 2 million. This means that the official BLS number for November of only 10,000 jobs being lost isn't simply unlikely it is theoretically impossible.
If the U.S. had a robust "stimulus plan" (i.e. where most of the stimulus was actually spent creating new jobs), then perhaps a net job loss of 500,000 jobs for November could have been plausible - as the huge number of lay-offs could have been off-set to that degree. However, we don't have to rely upon the weekly job-loss numbers to refute the propaganda from the Bureau of Labor Statistics. There is simply no demand strength in the U.S. economy to have possibly completely off-set the 2 million lay-offs for November (keeping in mind that this number is only a partial representation of total lay-offs).
Construction is still obviously not close to a break-even point in hiring. Exports remain weak, so there is no possibility of significant job gains there. The three levels of government are experiencing their largest drops in revenues in history, thus obviously there are net job losses from this sector - which led the U.S. economy in job growth for the last decade.
On the consumer front, Black Friday retail sales were disappointing, the most recent ISM survey on the service sector showed a contraction, and U.S. inventories continue to shrink - so there was obviously further weakness in the domestic economy, and no possibility of a break-even month here. Putting all the propaganda aside, all that has happened in the U.S. job market over the course of this entire year is that the weekly lay-offs went from 3 million per month (as an aggregate) down to 2 million per month. This "improvement" is simply not near enough to have ended net job losses in the U.S.
Putting aside the fact that the BLS jobs number isn't even theoretically possible, the reaction in the gold market was simply bizarre. Even if this number was authentic, there is nothing bearish for gold about more hiring taking place in the U.S. - given that the Federal Reserve and Treasury Department have already made it clear their reckless fiscal and monetary policies will remain in place indefinitely. This has extreme implications from an inflation standpoint.
If the U.S. economy were no longer losing jobs, this would eliminate one of the main deflationary forces in the U.S. economy, and real strength in the jobs market would also serve to halt most of the remaining deflationary forces - apart from the crippling levels of debt of the U.S. economy.
However, as I stated in a recent commentary, the market continues to ignore the true state of U.S. finances (see "Treasury Department Stalls Budget Report"). In that commentary, I mentioned how the U.S. Treasury Department had chosen to withhold its once-a-year report which measures the U.S. deficit using GAAP accounting principles - the same rules which all U.S. corporations are required to follow.
This annual report is mandated by law, and since the report has been released every November, the decision to hold back this report was obviously politically motivated. This is rather surprising - given that the U.S. media hides this report from the American people every year. How many Americans know that the real deficit for 2008 was $5.1 trillion? How many Americans know the real deficit has averaged over $4 trillion per year this entire decade? These are the Treasury Department's own numbers.
Nonetheless, apparently the U.S. government decided that the risk was too great that someone might actually pay attention to this year's report. Given that government spending has soared since the last estimate, while revenues have fallen off a cliff, the only suspense in that report is how many trillions have been added on to last year's total. John Williams (of shadowstats.com) is estimating the real deficit for 2009 to total nearly $9 trillion (compared to the "official deficit" of $1.4 trillion).
Thus, irrespective of whether the U.S. economy lost a million jobs or gained a million jobs, or broke even; this does not change the fact that the U.S. economy is hopelessly insolvent. It is not even theoretically possible for the U.S. economy to close this budget gap - especially since the government itself is predicting that more than half of every new dollar of debt for the next decade will be just interest payments on existing debt.
As I pointed out in another recent commentary (see "The Dynamics of Debt"), the U.S. economy can be thought of as being in the same shape as a homeowner trying to make payments on a $1 million mortgage - while earning only $10,000 per year. As with that hypothetical homeowner, the question is not "if" the United States will go bankrupt, only "when".
Given what is taking place in the real world, the move by investors to sell gold on Friday, and buy equities from the most hopelessly insolvent economy on the planet wasn't simply unwise, but totally insane. Certainly what should happen next week is for Friday's move to be totally reversed. However making short-term predictions about the market is generally a silly game at the best of times. Trying to predict the movements of a market which has severed all ties with the real world is simply a waste of time.
I sold nothing on Friday, and will be selling nothing next week - regardless of what takes place. Absolutely nothing has changed in the gold market. Should Friday's move persist for a few more days, this simply means a delay before gold's next move higher. Gold is the only real money. The U.S. is bankrupt. As I always suggest to investors: stay focused on "the big picture" and you will be fine.
Jeff Nielson
http://www.gold-eagle.com/editorials_08/nielson120509.html
on Sat, 12/12/2009 - 20:43
#161613
I had to do this...been a boring day and raining so well enjoy LIESman urban dictionary entry
http://i50.tinypic.com/2zxyzyg.jpg
on Sun, 12/13/2009 - 11:18
#161939
With a charactersitic bout of nerve over wisdom, let me offer just one more reply:
What exactly are you arguing about here? Whether I'm a jerk or a tool? Is that even worthy of a single reply? Ok, don't answer that.
What would seem to be worth everyone's time is the focus on the issue raised by the essential disagrement between Rick and myself: are the jobs numbers improving or not and what is the right investment play relative to the direction of jobs and the economy?
The question is not are the jobs numbers bad, awful and otherwise horrible now. That is irrefutable. But the existence of 15 million unemployed Americans and millions more discouraged workers don't tell us anything about whether the numbers are worsening or improving. And it doesn't tell us whether we should buy bonds or stocks or gold or cans of tuna fish (is there an ETF for that yet?) to prepare for the end of the world as we know it.
I offer four piece of evidence that the jobs market is improving and believe it will continue to do so:
1. The 4-week avg. of jobless claims (NEW inputs into the system) have stepped down dramatically from 674k at its worst in March to 474k in the last week.
2. Payroll job losses have been reduced to a 3-month average loss of 87k from 691k in losses in the first quarter. Inside the November report we learned of strong upward revisions to Sept. and Oct., a long workweek and the strongest monthly gain in temp. employment in five years.
3. The employment gauge of the ism mfr. index has risen to a rate that suggests job and economic growth. (though it came down slightly in the last month, it remains above 50)
4. Ridiculously high productivity rates that must come down, meaning more jobs and/or longer hours.
I am aware of other indicators that point the other way. The NFIB survey (which I report every month), the ISM services indicator employment component and the stubbornly high duration of unemployment, along with the EUC gains. Meanwhile, the unemployment rate may not be done rising.
But why spend time on personal attacks when history is unfolding all around us, when there are monumental debates to be had about the economy, the right policy, the data and, most important, how to make a buck at all this?
I wish you all happy and prosperous holidays and make a request to keep your eye on the prize, which for me is an expansive bonefish flat, on a warm, windless day and lots of time to enjoy it.
----Steve Liesman
on Sun, 12/13/2009 - 12:54
#162061
If there is anyone that should be unemployed, it's that idiot!
on Sun, 12/13/2009 - 15:07
#162243
Steve Needs a Zero hedge Mug for Xmas.... :-)
on Sun, 12/13/2009 - 23:13
#162795
He remembers reporting about it a number of times and even made the same argument that Santelli made, but forgot on that occasion. Hmm . Most people would have remembered it after it was brought up, but he totally forgot that he reported on it, made the same point, and that it was a real statistic. Oh but he stands by his data. yea ok. I trust you.
Post new comment