This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.

US Economy Will Return To December 2007 Employment Levels... In 2021!

Tyler Durden's picture


Even as Bernanke is receiving his last minute briefing on what to say (everything, EVERYTHING, is good) and what to play dumb on (explaining the price of gold for example), a new report by the Center for Economic and Policy Research concludes that digging ourselves out of the current unemployment hole, which is 7.5 million less people having jobs than did in December 2007, will take at least 4 years, and not occur prior to March 2014. However, this assumes a flat working-age population, something the Fed would love to be the case. Alas, the country is growing: and if one incorporates the effects of labor force growth into the above analysis, as the CEPR authors have done using CBO projections, then we may have a much larger problem on our hands: the study concludes that taking into account the approximately 14 million new job seekers in the future, then the December 2007 unemployment rate will not be met until April 2021! Welcome to the new normal. Of course, both of these analyses assume that the economy will immediately commence growing and generating jobs at the recovery rate seen in the 2000s, when about 166,000 jobs per month were being added. With every month that this does not happen the 2021 date will continue being pushed out further into the future. Perhaps one of the Senators today can ask a question of Bernanke just how he plans on reconciling this glaringly simple explanation for why the US economy will be underwater for a period of over a decade.

The CEPR report first describes the hole we are in:

Figure 1 shows the monthly change in total employment in the U.S. economy, using the Bureau of Labor Statistics’ monthly establishment survey, from the peak of the 2000s business cycle (December 2007) through the most recent month available (June 2010). Job losses peaked at about 700,000 per month between November 2008 and March 2009. From spring 2009 through the end of that year, the economy continued to shed jobs at a slower and slower pace. In 2010, the economy started to create jobs (on net) for the first time since 2007. Job growth was particularly fast in May 2010, but about 411,000 of the 431,000 net jobs created that month were temporary jobs with the decennial census. The economy shed 100,000 jobs in June 2010, in part reflecting the loss of temporary census jobs.

The monthly job loss figures, however, don’t give a clear picture of the depth of the problems facing the labor market. Figure 2 reproduces the net monthly job loss data from Figure 1, but also displays the cumulative change in employment, relative to the total employment level in December 2007. The main difficulty facing the labor market is not the employment losses in any given month, but rather the cumulative effect of two years of almost continual job losses. For seven months beginning in September 2009, the economy was over eight million jobs below its December 2007 level. Even with the jobs created so far in 2010, the economy remains almost 7.5 million jobs short of its prerecession level.

Looking at projection scenarios, here is the baseline scenario, which alone provides no Joy in mudville: using an assumed expansion case seen in the 2004-2007 economic recovery in which 166,000 jobs per month were created, the current 7.5 million hole would take about 4 years to fill.

Figure 3 shows the results of projecting future job creation assuming that, from July 2010 forward, the economy creates jobs at the same pace as the fastest four calendar years in the most recent economic expansion. (The period covers January 2004 through December 2007; job creation rates were about 0.12 percent per month, or about 166,000 jobs per month given the size of the current workforce.) The point where the projected cumulative job loss line crosses zero marks the year and month when overall employment will have returned to its December 2007 level. So, if job creation from here on proceeds at the same rate as it did in the 2000s expansion, the economy will not restore December 2007 employment levels until March 2014.

Yet what many completely have ignored up until the authors of this paper put it to paper, is that the US population is a-growing, and that factoring in the organic expansion of the US population will add millions to the labor force over the next decade: according to CBO estimates, the natural labor force growth rate is 90,000 a month. Adding this to the running future gap makes things far worse for any administration that will run on the promise of returning unemployment rate to recent levels. From the paper:

Meanwhile, the working-age population of the United States will be growing, as a steady stream of potential new workers enters the labor force each month. Returning to the December 2007 level of employment many years after that level was first achieved will still leave the economy in a jobs deficit relative to this expanded labor force.

Figure 4 incorporates the effects of this labor force growth into the analysis. The top line in the figure shows the cumulative change in the labor force, assuming that labor force growth follows CBO projections. (Based on CBO (2010), Table 2-2. This is analogous to the cumulative change in employment in the bottom half of Figures 2, 3, and 4. The CBO does not publish monthly projected increases in the labor supply, but these rates are implicit in their labor-market projections. Based on CBO projections, we assume a monthly growth in the labor force of just over 90,000 workers per month from January 2008 forward. Our projections assume that five percent of this increase will be unemployed at any given time, consistent with long-term CBO projections that the labor market will eventually return to a five percent unemployment rate.) In this figure, the point where the line for the cumulative job  change crosses the line tracing the cumulative growth in the labor force marks the year and month where the economy will have made up for both the jobs lost during the recession and the intervening growth in the labor force. If we assume job creation from July 2010 forward occurs at the pace set in the 2000s expansion, the economy will not catch up with the expanded labor force until April 2021.

Another way of looking at Figure 4 is to note that the line for cumulative job change crosses the cumulative change in the labor force at the point where the employment-to-population rate returns to what it was in December 2007. The figure assumes that the economy only needs to create jobs for 95 percent of the increase in the labor force, because CBO assumes that the economy will eventually reach and maintain a five percent unemployment rate. In 2007, the employment-to-population rate for the population 16 and over was 63.0 percent, almost 1.5 percentage points below the employment-to-population rate in 2000. Our projections, therefore, set a low bar for total employment relative to a standard that would require returning to the 2000 employment rate.

And keep in mind that the above scenario assumes that the economy adds 166,000 jobs a month each month, for just under 11 years straight! With the current economic prospects for the economy, in which companies continue to lay people off, and in which monthly NFP data is skewed drastically due to the ongoing side effects of the census, and where fiscal stimuli in fact encourage people to be unemployed and collect jobless insurance rather than work, this baseline assumption is ludicrous. The reality is that the economy will likely NEVER return to a December 2007 jobless rate, as proposed by El-Erian and his New Normal concept, just like the Fed will most likely NEVER raise rates in this latest iteration of pre-reset capitalism. And as the Fed's dual mandate of jobs and inflation is now tarnished beyond repair, what other valid justification is there to retain the Federal Reserve which does nothing but skew the market, and necessitate the need for constant regulation? The only way to return to efficient markets is to do away with regulation completely, however that would also mean an elimination of the Fed, and its most artificial concept of free lending to banks via the Discount Window, i.e., endless moral hazard for Wall Street's casinos. As long as the Fed persists, regulation is needed, which by definition creates perfect assymetries in the market, and sows the seeds for the next market crash. One can only dream that instead of lying to the population and to the Senate that all is well in the economy, that at today's Humphrey Hawkins meeting Bernanke will instead anounce the end of the Fed. Alas, that will require a revolution (non-violent or otherwise), as the moneyed interests will never allow a change in the status quo of such massive proportions. Of course, if more and more people realize the true sad state of the economy driven to its current predicament precisely by the Fed's constant one sided actions which favor a few millionaires at the expense of those that will be jobless for decades to come, perhaps this revolution is not that far off...

Full CEPR paper can be found here.

h/t Michael


- advertisements -

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Wed, 07/21/2010 - 11:40 | 480869 NOTW777
NOTW777's picture

all said while seals are clapping for the destruction of US by barney and dodd;  lets hear what the king has to say.

Wed, 07/21/2010 - 11:47 | 480891 suteibu
suteibu's picture

He's saying a lot of stuff.  What he's not saying is that he just took over commerce in this country.  Control financing, control commerce.

Wed, 07/21/2010 - 12:17 | 480963 GIANTKILR
GIANTKILR's picture

I puked a little at that shamful display! What nerve!

Wed, 07/21/2010 - 11:43 | 480873 jkruffin
jkruffin's picture

Is Benny Boy going to be televised?  If so, what time does he start lying on air?

Wed, 07/21/2010 - 11:46 | 480886 firstdivision
firstdivision's picture

2pm EDT

Wed, 07/21/2010 - 11:54 | 480907 DavidC
Wed, 07/21/2010 - 11:44 | 480875 Miles Kendig
Miles Kendig's picture

Jobs?  Work?  The only job all loyal Americans need to concern themselves with is to SPEND.  Spend like there is no tomorrow.  Spend to save everyone else.  After all, if China is still willing to trade worthless junk to us for worthless pieces of paper that keep Americans at home, spending then why try to produce anything but debt that can never be repaid....?

Wed, 07/21/2010 - 11:46 | 480884 Duuude
Duuude's picture


Plenty of work here...

All of these places exist just outside Washington in what amounts to the capital of an alternative geography of the United States, one defined by the concentration of top-secret government organizations and the companies that do work for them. This Fort Meade cluster is the largest of a dozen such clusters across the United States that are the nerve centers of Top Secret America and its 854,000 workers.


In the article top rankers say that nobody knows what anybody else is doing.



Wed, 07/21/2010 - 11:53 | 480905 Miles Kendig
Miles Kendig's picture

There is another mega cluster in my area with the Lawrence-Livermore/Cal, Silicon Valley & SF fed action in full swing.  850K  hmmm.  That's way less than the number committed to supervised incarceration here in the US.

Wed, 07/21/2010 - 13:00 | 481076 carbonmutant
carbonmutant's picture

"supervised incarceration" is than an HR term?


Wed, 07/21/2010 - 16:36 | 481741 Miles Kendig
Miles Kendig's picture

Yep.  And it applies to more than regular cube dwellers... be they voluntary, involuntary or indentured.

Wed, 07/21/2010 - 13:09 | 481083 sethstorm
sethstorm's picture

The problem is that you have to have a sponsor to get a clearance.

Once you get that, it's fine.  Before that, it's a clusterfsck of "who you know".

Wed, 07/21/2010 - 12:15 | 480957 Caviar Emptor
Caviar Emptor's picture

Right on there bro. After the 9/11 disaster, with bodies still burning, the mayor of New York City (Rudy Giuliani) had this advice: Shop! He counseled us to patronize the restaurants and shops and carry on our normal economic activity (as did President Bush a day later) . Was it stupendous callousness? Nope. It was fear. Fear that the economy would collapse if we failed in our one and only mission as American citizens in the global economy: shop till you drop. Aspire to ever larger homes and SUVs, ever flatter TVs and snazzier jeans. 

In the moments after the World Trade Center fell, the Pentagon burned and America was under attack, the preoccupation of our high officials was that we not retrench from being the world's fattest consumers, pigs at the trough feasting on an omnivorous diet of anything and everything paid for with non-existant funds (credit). To Giuliani and Bush, the darkest thought was not so much about the victims. It was about the potnetial collapse of the economic bubble. 


Wed, 07/21/2010 - 13:29 | 481131 aheady
aheady's picture

NOT junk.

Wed, 07/21/2010 - 13:51 | 481188 Red Neck Repugnicant
Red Neck Repugnicant's picture

Perfect post!  I absolutely agree!

shop till you drop. Aspire to ever larger homes and SUVs, ever flatter TVs and snazzier jeans.

And shop 'til we drop, we did.  Keep Amurica rollin'.  Somewhere on YouTube there is a video of Bush telling everyone to "go shopping." 

It also speaks to why interest rates were keep too low for too long.  The primary concern the Bush administration had was that GDP would increase during his presidency.  If it couldn't happen naturally, they would artifically juice the economy with reckless, careless fiscal policy.  Whether it was interest rates, or war, or encouraging the use of exotic mortgages (see Greenspan), or the creation of an entirely phoney economy, the Bush administration was going to get their GDP numbers. 

And they did.  In the fucking ditch. 

Wed, 07/21/2010 - 14:23 | 481284 Reductio ad Absurdum
Reductio ad Absurdum's picture

You're still here?

Wed, 07/21/2010 - 14:47 | 481394 Red Neck Repugnicant
Red Neck Repugnicant's picture


That's what your wife said when I stayed for a cigarette this morning.

You two really are soulmates.

Wed, 07/21/2010 - 11:43 | 480876 DoctoRx
DoctoRx's picture

Don't know about 2021, but a balanced economy involves rewarding savers and not parasites or speculators.  Too many imbalances and command and control aspects of this economy for our good IMHO . . .

Wed, 07/21/2010 - 12:41 | 481019 Johnny Bravo
Johnny Bravo's picture

What the article doesn't talk about is that eventually, all the baby boomers that CAUSED this economic crisis will start retiring.  That should help free up some jobs eventually, as the population has not grown faster than them for ages.

Wed, 07/21/2010 - 13:46 | 481176 RockyRacoon
RockyRacoon's picture

That would be me, Johnny. 

And I had you in mind while plotting the ruination of the country.

Wed, 07/21/2010 - 14:26 | 481296 Reductio ad Absurdum
Reductio ad Absurdum's picture

If you want to free up jobs Bravo, just stop Mexicans from pouring over the border.

The only reason the population of the U.S. is growing is due to Mexican migrants and their absurdly large families.

Wed, 07/21/2010 - 14:31 | 481318 Johnny Bravo
Johnny Bravo's picture

I should listen to your investment ideas then, since they worked out so great on a macroeconomic scale...

Wed, 07/21/2010 - 15:27 | 481538 RockyRacoon
RockyRacoon's picture

They worked out great for me.

You are the one who is struggling.

At your age I had a full business started, after spending 4 years in the Air Force.

Keep in mind:  The fat lady has not sung, the big turd has yet to hit the fan.

'Tain't over 'til it's over....

Wed, 07/21/2010 - 14:45 | 481388 tmosley
tmosley's picture

I wouldn't count on them retiring.  Decimated 401Ks and being forced to prematurely dip into retirement savings for living expenses is taking its toll on most of the boomers.

Wed, 07/21/2010 - 14:49 | 481403 Johnny Bravo
Johnny Bravo's picture

Here is what I think would be the ideal solution, if I were in charge.

I'd let the baby boomers retire on social security earlier.  (Maybe 60 or 62ish)

Then, raise taxes on my generation to pay for the shortfall in revenue.  Sure, we'll pay more, but at least we'll be able to get jobs.
I'd be willing to pay more in taxes to create opportunity for my generation... 

Wed, 07/21/2010 - 15:10 | 481502 ColonelCooper
ColonelCooper's picture


You're a student right?  With no undue disrespect, WTF do you know about taxes?

Federal Income Tax

State Income Tax

Payroll Tax

Capital Gains Tax

Property Tax

You're a bright kid, and you potentially have a good future ahead of you.  But until you get out there for real, and claw your way up to wherever it is you're gonna end up, you have no idea what taxes mean.

We don't need more taxes.  We need to quit spending money on bullshit that the government has no business meddling in.  This runs the gammet from porkbarrel to foreign policy.  We are taxed enough.  Even if I agreed with your principle, how are you going to fund the $109,000,000,000,000 in liabilities if you let the biggest percentage of them off the hook right now?

Epic Fail on that one.


Wed, 07/21/2010 - 18:43 | 482101 sgt_doom
sgt_doom's picture

Sorry, Johnny Bravo, but you've got it all wrong.

Firstly, during a recession (or really another Great Depression), one doesn't raise taxes -- although restoring taxes on the super-rich is in order (from the Bush tax cuts, and corporate non-payment of taxes).

Next, comes tax recovery, since over 70 percent of American-based multinationals and corporation pay no federal taxes (via profit laundering, profit shifting, transfer pricing, offshore hidden capital, etc., etc.).

Reinstitute what Bush wrought: put back the "high-roller division" in the IRS -- which Bush abolished, and was responsible for the greatest tax recovery on high net worth individuals and corporations.  Also, that administration eviscerated the SEC's risk management section, which was 100 strong, and reduced to one body.

Like your idea about early retirement, but it may be good for a temp fix, but the entire system be rotten, Johnny me boyo!

Wed, 07/21/2010 - 11:44 | 480877 Moric
Moric's picture

Just curious, but when exactly were baby boomers going to retire?

Wed, 07/21/2010 - 11:45 | 480883 firstdivision
firstdivision's picture

You need to work on your delivery on your jokes.

Wed, 07/21/2010 - 11:48 | 480888 Miles Kendig
Miles Kendig's picture

60..  No, 62.  OOps, 65.  Strike that, 67.  Damn, there is no money left so the boomers gotta keep slaving away at Wal-Mart greeting all of the under 50's coming in to buy worthless Chinese made crap.

Wed, 07/21/2010 - 11:51 | 480902 PC Load Letter
PC Load Letter's picture

Kinda hard to save when you don't have a job and are in the process of losing your house.....

Wed, 07/21/2010 - 12:00 | 480921 hedgeless_horseman
hedgeless_horseman's picture

Tyler: "I know who you are and where you live PC Load Letter, if you're not employed and on your way to saving 20% of your income in 3 weeks I will find you and kill you. Now go home..."

PC Load Letter stopped surfing the web and ran away in tears.

Tyler: "Tomorrow will be the most beautiful day of PC Load Letter's life. His breakfast will taste better than any meal you and I have ever tasted."

Wed, 07/21/2010 - 13:30 | 481134 aheady
aheady's picture


Wed, 07/21/2010 - 11:45 | 480882 BlackBeard
BlackBeard's picture

Nice.  The monkeys still use straight lines to project non-linear data.

Wed, 07/21/2010 - 11:48 | 480893 VK
VK's picture

ROFL! Indeed, just wait till the next leg of the collapse phase kicks in. Unemployment is going to soar and then they can shove their linear analysis up their proverbial behinds. Fraud is not conducive to economic growth. ZIRP is not conducive to savings. Farcism is not conducive for confidence. The titanic is sinking.

Wed, 07/21/2010 - 13:57 | 481204 carbonmutant
carbonmutant's picture


Wed, 07/21/2010 - 13:58 | 481207 carbonmutant
carbonmutant's picture


Wed, 07/21/2010 - 11:47 | 480889 Mont Bleu
Mont Bleu's picture

What a serious fallacy to compare expected recovery with post-2000 recovery rates.

Wed, 07/21/2010 - 11:49 | 480895 matthylland
matthylland's picture

like a lost decade...where have we seen that before?

Wed, 07/21/2010 - 11:56 | 480917 JLee2027
JLee2027's picture

Exactly.  The Lost Decade may have been tolerated by the Japanese, but it won't fly here.  

Throw the bums out.

Wed, 07/21/2010 - 12:44 | 481031 Johnny Bravo
Johnny Bravo's picture

The difference is that the Japanese actually have a sense of duty to their society.

Instead of paying CEOs 80 bajillion dollars for laying off workers, it is considered a shame to fire workers in Japan.

Maybe that's why despite low economic growth they have an unemployment rate of 5%, which is normal.

Wed, 07/21/2010 - 13:13 | 481096 sethstorm
sethstorm's picture

The United States had that in large amounts until businesses figured that they were better off screwing their fellow citizens.  The Japanese had very unique circumstances that gave them both US-inspired industry and their sense of duty. 

But don't tell that to the Chinese immigrants on contract labor that just assembled some latte-drinking person's Prius.  They might revolt and die in a huge "accident".

Wed, 07/21/2010 - 14:42 | 481378 Johnny Bravo
Johnny Bravo's picture

I think it was pretty common in the United States until the "Fuck Everybody Else, be Selfish"  message of Ronald Reagan.

Thu, 07/22/2010 - 17:45 | 484459 RockyRacoon
RockyRacoon's picture

76 economists, academics, gold analysts and market commentators who have developed sound rationale as to why gold could quite possibly go to a parabolic top of at least $2,500 an ounce to even as much as an unimaginable $15,000 before the bubble finally pops!

Wed, 07/21/2010 - 11:49 | 480896 NOTW777
NOTW777's picture

"keep in mind that the above scenario assumes that the economy adds 166,000 jobs a month each month, for just under 11 years straight!"


sure thing

Wed, 07/21/2010 - 11:51 | 480898 Bill Lumbergh
Bill Lumbergh's picture

These meetings are like bad reality television...every one knows the plot and admits the show is a waste of time but continues to watch on a regular basis anyway.

Wed, 07/21/2010 - 11:53 | 480904 financeguru500
financeguru500's picture

Are you talking about scripted reality television? Where it acts like it is reality television but in fact it was pre-written and comes off looking like acting skills of a daytime soap opera.

Yeah, i feel myself wondering why I even pay attention to these sort of things.

Wed, 07/21/2010 - 12:32 | 481001 crzyhun
crzyhun's picture

Yahhhh, good to see and consult the Bob's on this jobs thing. They know what's up.


Wed, 07/21/2010 - 11:51 | 480899 financeguru500
financeguru500's picture

I disagree with this article. All we need to get better unemployment numbers is for our department of labor to continue fudging the numbers like they have been.

As unemployment gets worse, they say it gets better. Who do they have working for them anyways, George Orwell?

Wed, 07/21/2010 - 11:52 | 480903 potatomafia
potatomafia's picture

Soooo, we are going to keep extending unemployment benefits for another 11 years??


That should work out really good....

Wed, 07/21/2010 - 12:45 | 481038 Johnny Bravo
Johnny Bravo's picture

Nah, I think our money is better spent starting wars that nobody wants and cutting taxes on the top 1%.  That's what will begin to happen in November when the Republicans get control of the congress again.

Wed, 07/21/2010 - 14:08 | 481223 potatomafia
potatomafia's picture

That's what will begin to happen in November when the Republicans get control of the congress again.


What are you talking about?  How have we slowed any of our war spending since the Dems took control?  You make it sound like it will be different... I havent seen this admin. make any changes worth noting, have you?

Wed, 07/21/2010 - 14:32 | 481325 Reductio ad Absurdum
Reductio ad Absurdum's picture

Not to mention that almost every war the U.S. has been in has been started by Democrats. Learn your history, Bravo.

Wed, 07/21/2010 - 14:36 | 481346 Johnny Bravo
Johnny Bravo's picture

Do Republicans ever say anything besides "drink the kool aid" and "learn your history?"

Democrats don't really start as many wars as Republicans... 

World War II was started by somebody else, not us.
Korea - Republicans, Eisenhower
Vietnam - Kennedy assassinated for wanting to withdraw.  First troops under Eisenhower.
All the small wars of the 80s - Reagan
Somalia, Iraq - Bush
Kosovo - UN
Iraq, Afghanistan - Bush

Wed, 07/21/2010 - 14:44 | 481385 Johnny Bravo
Johnny Bravo's picture

Although, the last war we won (World War II) was won by a Democrat.

Republicans are more interested in keeping military bases around the world to enrich their donors, and don't actually want to "win" wars.

Wed, 07/21/2010 - 14:56 | 481444 tmosley
tmosley's picture

lol, if you are going to say that the war in Kosovo was started by the UN, then the war in Korea was also started by the UN, as was Somalia.

Also, Truman started the Vietnam War.  The first troops went in under HIS watch, as "military advisors".

That said, all you fucking righties and lefties are warmongers.  If you support EITHER party, you have blood on your hands.  Both had a role in all of those wars, as both played roles in the current financial crisis.

Wed, 07/21/2010 - 14:33 | 481329 Johnny Bravo
Johnny Bravo's picture

I agree that they haven't done anything to end the war, but they didn't start any either... 

Wed, 07/21/2010 - 14:12 | 481246 malek
malek's picture

Yeah, just like they quit doing a federal budget, they will omit to put a limit into the next unemployment benefits extension.

I mean it's gonna get better sometime, right?
Until then we just have to wait and cover our eyes.

Wed, 07/21/2010 - 11:55 | 480911 Mad Max
Mad Max's picture

In the rosier scenarios, by 2021 we should look somewhat like Spain does today.  (Of course in 2021 Spain may look rather like Somalia does today.)

However, I can easily foresee dramatically improved employment within just five years: as the US debt collapse, local government collapse, and real estate collapse take hold, and combine with the pain of higher oil prices as we pass peak oil, we should see far more people in the US living as subsistence farmers or informal small-scale recycling agents.  So nominal employment numbers should be much higher, soon!  (Standard of living, perhaps not so much.)

Wed, 07/21/2010 - 14:58 | 481452 tmosley
tmosley's picture

Spain will look like Somalia?  Doubtful.  Somalia has the best telecommunications infrastructure of any nation on that continent.  No, I think Spain will look a lot more like Zimbabwe than Somalia.

Wed, 07/21/2010 - 11:56 | 480913 Mako
Mako's picture

Unemployment is not going to return to 2007 levels during anyone's lifetime on this board.  2021 is Fantasyland.  That's all folks, it's over.  (Insert picture of Bugs Bunny here chewing on a carrot)

Wed, 07/21/2010 - 11:59 | 480914 Red Neck Repugnicant
Red Neck Repugnicant's picture

I hate to say this, but according to Figure 1, it appears the Obama administration rescued the economy from the total incompetence of the prior Republican administration. It's no wonder that the Republicans are so hyper-paranoid about loosing all their credibility.

Just look at the chart.  Everything reversed as soon as that dumb fucking cowboy went back to chasing fire flies in Crawford.

Wed, 07/21/2010 - 12:02 | 480927 Robslob
Robslob's picture

Blaming one or the other shows your ignorance of the process DESIGNED so you would be as ignorant to do so...

Or in more simple terms..."they" are all the same fucking guy...

Wed, 07/21/2010 - 12:19 | 480974 Red Neck Repugnicant
Red Neck Repugnicant's picture

Or in more simple terms..."they" are all the same fucking guy...


Many of you around here keep preaching that theme: bush=clinton=bush=obama=big bird=doesn't fucking matter.

If that's true, why vote?

Wed, 07/21/2010 - 12:25 | 480983 hedgeless_horseman
hedgeless_horseman's picture

Good question.  Maybe voting out all incumbents is as close as we can get to term limits, and just slightly better than dictatorial rule? You take what you can get, or you lose it. 

Wed, 07/21/2010 - 12:48 | 481042 Johnny Bravo
Johnny Bravo's picture

Except that voting out all the incumbents would just put the same party that ruined the economy back in power.

Wed, 07/21/2010 - 13:22 | 481063 hedgeless_horseman
hedgeless_horseman's picture

The logic flaws in your comment are obvious.  Nevertheless, thank you, Johnny Bravo, for helping to support my thesis that the necessity of indoctrinating new candidates at the very least annoys TPTB, for whom you are a known stooge, if not actually helps to affect the system in a positive way.

Win or lose, you keep rooting for your home team.  Is it the blue or the red team?  And don't forget to buy, buy, buy that league-licensed crap.  The team owners have bills to pay, too, you know.

Wed, 07/21/2010 - 14:41 | 481370 Johnny Bravo
Johnny Bravo's picture

2000 - Great economy with surpluses that is creating jobs

2008 - shitty economy with record deficits shedding 700000 jobs a month.

I think it's pretty much fact that every time the economy takes a major dive, it is at the end of a Republican administration.

Bush II - This financial crisis
Bush I - recession of 1991
Reagan - S&L scandal, stock market crash of 1987
Nixon, Ford - Stagflation, bad economy of 1975-1982
Hoover - Great Depression.

Would you like me to go on?

Panic of 1873 - Johnson

Voting out all incumbents will do nothing but give the Rethuglicans a majority.

I don't even know what TPTB is.  How can I be a known stooge for them?

Oh wait, I'm Nadler, and I'm getting paid 8 million dollars a year to make these posts.  I forgot.

Wed, 07/21/2010 - 14:55 | 481432 Johnny Bravo
Johnny Bravo's picture

With all of that said, I'm not particularly impressed with the Democrats' policies either.  I just think that they're less worse economically.

If tax cuts worked, we wouldn't have lost jobs all throughout the 2000s.

All tax cuts do is give my former boss more money (35 grand) to piss away on four days of playing in Vegas, while he balks at buying a 500 dollar computer and lays workers off... 

Wed, 07/21/2010 - 15:03 | 481476 BoeingSpaceliner797
BoeingSpaceliner797's picture

I didn't realize the approximately 468 seats up-for-grabs in November are all held by Democrats, as your statement implies.

Wed, 07/21/2010 - 12:31 | 480999 Mako
Mako's picture

Vote whoever you want in there it isn't going to save the system, of course, getting the wrong person in there could still potential get you a Hilter, either way a few billion are going to have to go.

Wed, 07/21/2010 - 14:21 | 481244 Rusty Shorts
Rusty Shorts's picture

The great die-off is coming Mako, glad someone besides me can see the hard, cold truth.


"Our present “business-as-usual” model, which requires endless economic growth and endless job creation, is no longer physically possible. Here’s why:

            1.      Business-as-usual depends upon jobs and markets to distribute goods and services.
            2.      Economic growth and increasing job availability require increasing net energy.
            3.      Net energy correlates with peak oil and both are expected to decrease for decades. See the “Net Hubbert Curve” in David Murphy’s graph above and read this footnote: [3]
            4.      Decades of decreasing net energy will cause job opportunities to decrease for decades because less and less energy will be available for economic development.
            5.      Globally, millions of new workers enter the job market each year, but job availability is expected to decline by millions of positions each year. Eventually, the projected high unemployment among young men will cause catastrophic political failures similar to those that led to Hitler’s takeover of German democracy. Therefore, business-as-usual is no longer a viable method of distributing goods and services and a new method must be found—and soon!



  Our present method of distributing goods and services works something like this:

                 Our government loans money to banks, so bankers can operate businesses (which require buildings, computers, furniture, lights, air conditioning, employees, commuting, etc.)
                 The bankers then lend money to other businesses, like restaurants, real estate developers, etc. (which also require buildings, computers, commuters, advertising, accountants, etc.)
                 So the employees of these restaurants, real estate developers, etc. can buy a car and drive to the store (with even more buildings, computers, commuters, etc.)
                 Just to buy a loaf of bread!

      The “market system” has to be the most inefficient organization possible!

      Why not simply have government pay someone to pick up that loaf of bread at the bakery and deliver it to the consumer? This is a form of distribution that would eliminate the banks, most of the other businesses, and all the stores. Most Americans would no longer need a car to commute to work or run to the store! However, some private businesses that provide critical services would still be operated but at our government’s direction."


"To put this in context, you must remember that estimates of the long-term carrying capacity of Earth with relatively optimistic assumptions about consumption, technologies, and equity (A x T), are in the vicinity of two billion people. Today's population cannot be sustained on the 'interest' generated by natural ecosystems, but is consuming its vast supply of natural capital -- especially deep, rich agricultural soils, 'fossil' groundwater, and biodiversity -- accumulated over centuries to eons. In some places soils, which are generated on a time scale of centimeters per century are disappearing at rates of centimeters per year. Some aquifers are being depleted at dozens of times their recharge rates, and we have embarked on the greatest extinction episode in 65 million years." Paul Ehrlich (Sept. 25, 1998)

Wed, 07/21/2010 - 12:34 | 481005 Internet Tough Guy
Internet Tough Guy's picture

Moron, you don't elect the government, just a few puppets.

Wed, 07/21/2010 - 12:42 | 481026 Oquities
Oquities's picture

what a beautiful day if not one person showed up to vote, showing their real awareness of this fraudelent $y$tem.

Wed, 07/21/2010 - 15:05 | 481481 BoeingSpaceliner797
BoeingSpaceliner797's picture


Wed, 07/21/2010 - 12:43 | 481027 SheepDog-One
SheepDog-One's picture

Um, no, actually the only one around here I see constantly preaching about 'bushclintonobama' is your dumb ass!

Wed, 07/21/2010 - 13:12 | 481093 Red Neck Repugnicant
Red Neck Repugnicant's picture


Your own wool is covering your eyes. If it gets any longer, it might get intertwined in that red rubber ball lodged in your mouth. Be careful.

There is a very distictive pro-republican slant on this forum. 

Granted, there are many here who are anti-government/libertarian, and they have my respects. 

But don't fool yourself - much of the anti-Obama bullshit around here is from indoctrinated Republicans who will blindly vote on the right until God tazers them with a lightening bolt through their trailer.

They may be too ashamed to admit they vote Republican (especially after the past 8 years), but they will every time.


Wed, 07/21/2010 - 13:31 | 481137 JR
JR's picture

Most all the political comments that I’ve seen on this blog since I’ve been here seem to recognize that the leadership of both parties is part of the Oligarch support system.  Former Democrats and former Republicans appear to be gathering here to identify the financial problems overwhelming our beloved country and frankly, very little has been said concerning the media “he said, she said” circus between the declining influence of the two political parties.

Meanwhile, Independent identification is surging. The proportion of Independents now equals its highest level in 70 years, primarily owing to defections from the Republican Party.

Wed, 07/21/2010 - 14:48 | 481400 ColonelCooper
ColonelCooper's picture

+1000.  What Repugnifuck can't seem to figure out is the difference between fiscal conservatism and "Republicans".

Most of the comments and commentators here are not Pro ANYTHING about our government.  Republican's IMO are worse than Democrats.  At least Democrats are honest about spending us into oblivion.  Republicans preach fiscal responsibility and fuck you to death when you close your eyes.  Then when they get thrown out of power they have a "come to Jesus" moment and we all believe in them again, like the sheeple that we are.

If Repugnifuck honestly can't see the difference on display here, he should stick to watching DVR's of Keith Olbermann.


Wed, 07/21/2010 - 13:42 | 481168 SheepDog-One
SheepDog-One's picture

Go hang yourself immediately, moron.

Wed, 07/21/2010 - 12:44 | 481032 trav7777
trav7777's picture

some of us keep trying to convince idiots that major party votes ARE the wasted votes

Wed, 07/21/2010 - 12:55 | 481058 Gromit
Gromit's picture

I'll be voting in November.

Local school board want to protect their 7% pay raise by levying a parcel tax on all county real estate, would cost me $1500 pa.

Politics is local.

Wed, 07/21/2010 - 15:00 | 481462 tmosley
tmosley's picture

You don't have to vote (R) or (D), you know.

Wed, 07/21/2010 - 12:03 | 480933 Mako
Mako's picture

You are misinformed.  Bush in the final days nor Obama rescued anything, all the Federal government did was slow the rate of decline.  

The system is going to collapse and there isn't anyone you are going to put in the White House that is going to stop it.

Wed, 07/21/2010 - 12:07 | 480939 ExistentialSkeptic
ExistentialSkeptic's picture

I want a non-perishable stock of what he's on, so I can keep it in the bunker for when my family is "employed" tearing down empty commercial space for raw materials.

No /sarc tag, unfortunately!

Wed, 07/21/2010 - 12:41 | 481018 trav7777
trav7777's picture

naw...job losses slowed well before the election. The bump of positive was just census hiring and other gov BS.

Pretty soon the curve will just flatten out bc nobody will be left to be fired. Then all is saved

Wed, 07/21/2010 - 12:44 | 481030 Mako
Mako's picture

You have a long way to go before you see the bottom.

Wed, 07/21/2010 - 11:56 | 480916 virgilcaine
virgilcaine's picture

buy Mcd, Pep, (frito lay div.) and Laz boy stock.

Wed, 07/21/2010 - 11:56 | 480918 DavidC
DavidC's picture

Just in case anyone's missed my reply to jkruffin above, Benny will be on C-SPAN3 at 2p.m. ET (Which, I think I'm correct in saying, is 7 p.m. in the UK);


Wed, 07/21/2010 - 12:03 | 480931 CurrencySpider
CurrencySpider's picture

Barney and Dod have given eachother poison ivy from rubbing their butts together.

Wed, 07/21/2010 - 12:04 | 480934 JLee2027
JLee2027's picture

I really didn't need to see that mental image at lunch time.


Wed, 07/21/2010 - 12:03 | 480932 JLee2027
JLee2027's picture

If I remember correctly the last meeting notes from the FED said it would take 5-6 years for the economy to recover. I'm still surprised there wasn't a large public venting of rage over that.  It's simple unacceptable and a lot of politicians should be honing their resumes.  And now it's 10 years?  

Wed, 07/21/2010 - 13:15 | 481102 sethstorm
sethstorm's picture

That's what you get when employers can say no much easier than someone can find work.

Wed, 07/21/2010 - 12:05 | 480936 uno
uno's picture

Never - Ever under estimate America with an Education System that can provide adults with such Insights as this:


Wed, 07/21/2010 - 12:05 | 480937 I am a Man I am...
I am a Man I am Forty's picture

Government support for housing and financials up 23% this year...

Wed, 07/21/2010 - 12:14 | 480951 I think I need ...
I think I need to buy a gun's picture

We are screwed....hunker down....the only thing left come the new year will be gold and treasuries. The banks are buying the treasuries thats our new currency (gold backed). You may be getting a free house if they bankrupt fannie and freddie. its the only way out or everyone will be on the street. Thats why paulson is calling for a housing boom in 2011. Prices are coming down to normal levels. The federal reserve note is gone. I think everyones debt gets wiped clean. Gold to 5000-10000 based on less money supply solely treasuries. The jobs will continue being lost we are in an avalanche thats not stopping......Even if you get a free house u still have to pay taxes and heat with 40% unemployment that may be tough.


Wed, 07/21/2010 - 12:50 | 481046 Johnny Bravo
Johnny Bravo's picture

I say why stop at 10000?

When the United States is indistinguishable from Zimbabwe, gold will be at 25000, on its way to 50 bajillion.

Wed, 07/21/2010 - 12:53 | 481052 Bam_Man
Bam_Man's picture

Giving people a "free house" means that everyone else's house is suddenly worth nothing. Actually less than nothing, due to taxes and upkeep.

Don't see how this results in a "housing boom".

Unless you mean the rise in prices resulting from the hyperinflation caused by a "debt jubilee" and FRN dollar collapse. 

Wed, 07/21/2010 - 12:18 | 480970 buzzsaw99
buzzsaw99's picture

Everyone will have a job spying on everyone else within three years.

Wed, 07/21/2010 - 12:18 | 480971 old naughty
old naughty's picture

166,000 additional jobs a month for the next eleven years?

Unemployment benefits extended for another eleven years?

Bugs Bunny chewing on the carrot? What carrot?

No need to dream on, we are fcuked.

Let the comet cometh.




Wed, 07/21/2010 - 12:19 | 480975 CrashisOptimistic
CrashisOptimistic's picture

It would do everyone a lot of good to get into one specific, particular habit.


Any projection or expectation or scenario presented that goes out beyond 3 years, without consideration of oil depletion, should be ignored.


Oil depletion will kill billions of people.  Soon.  This is not a short or long thing.  This isn't a play on oil's price because none of that will matter on an Earth of 900 million people.

Wed, 07/21/2010 - 12:21 | 480976 ejmoosa
ejmoosa's picture

To control the people you'll need control of education(check), health care(check), and the money(check).

Now to lock down the media for any dissenting opinions and they will have enslaved us all.

Without a single shot being fired, mind you.



Wed, 07/21/2010 - 12:32 | 481000 SheepDog-One
SheepDog-One's picture

Hmmm ejmoosa well only 1 thing theyve not factored in- 100 million+ armed americans. We'll see how their Bolshevik revolution 2.0 goes. Of course if americans are as stupid and lazy and THEY believe they are, then yep its simply slavery for all. And they will deserve it!

Wed, 07/21/2010 - 12:42 | 481023 ejmoosa
ejmoosa's picture


I meant that the Marxists took complete control of the greatest Republic the world had ever seen without a single shot being fired. 

I fear that those 100 million well armed Americans will not be enough.

There's series of books Matt Bracken has written that foretell most of what we are seeing.  And he wrote these books years ago.  Things can change a lot faster than even those who are prepared may expect.


I sure hope I am wrong.

But if not, I will not succumb easily.



Wed, 07/21/2010 - 12:25 | 480981 uno
uno's picture

Huffington Post today has unemployed college grads talking about the job hunt

Wed, 07/21/2010 - 12:56 | 481068 trav7777
trav7777's picture

I'm reading these articles and so far, EVERY SINGLE one of them has an utterly WORTHLESS degree!

WTF can you DO with a political science degree??  Or English? The days of "just going to college" and "just getting a bachelors degree" = ticket to a cushy job sittin at a desk pushing paper in a pantsuit and getting real wealth for it are OVER

Wed, 07/21/2010 - 12:31 | 480982 Caviar Emptor
Caviar Emptor's picture

All isn't lost! Our high officials are drawing up PLan B for the US economy as we speak. The solution to high chronic unemployment is at hand. Don't employ them. But make sure they still have ready cash to spend on Chinese crap. So far the plan is going well: extend unemployment benefits forever, food stamps, medicare/caid and other forms of public assistance. Soon to be unveiled: cash for junkers, a program to enable the unemployed to buy new smartphones, netbooks and flat screens. Cash for flunkers will allow permanent, rolling re-education at for-profit internet colleges. Cash for pumpers will allow the unemployed to participate in the stock market. 

Wed, 07/21/2010 - 12:29 | 480990 SheepDog-One
SheepDog-One's picture

LMAO so charts indicate a straight-uptrend from here till 2021? Dream on.

Wed, 07/21/2010 - 12:29 | 480992 Amish Hacker
Amish Hacker's picture

Welcome to the new normal. Instead of wondering what it will be like, take a look around at the so-called Third World, and our future path will become clear: low wages, permanently high levels of unemployment, low purchasing power, huge gap between rich and poor, high rates of incarceration, widespread corruption throughout government, more intrusive security agencies, higher taxes, capital controls, Big Brotherism... you get the idea. Think Guatemala.

Wed, 07/21/2010 - 12:36 | 481009 Internet Tough Guy
Internet Tough Guy's picture

Back when I was picking beans in Guatamala we used to make fresh coffee, right off the trees.

Wed, 07/21/2010 - 12:53 | 481054 trav7777
trav7777's picture

Guatemala?  Hell, look at Colombia or Brazil or Argentina.

Guatemala is a bit extreme, but they're all kinda apropos.

Even in an upward economic trajectory, nations like Brazil and Chile have vast underclasses.  In Colombia, whole families live together, relying on the wages of 1 or 2 people to support 10.

THAT is the future.  Better have skills that people need.  Gonna be a lot of hungry BAs out there.

One POSITIVE side effect is that women will lose their bullshit snotty self-entitlement and abandon the princess mentality.

Wed, 07/21/2010 - 13:08 | 481080 Bam_Man
Bam_Man's picture

women will lose their bullshit snotty self-entitlement and abandon the princess mentality

During the Bruning deflation in early 1930's Germany many considered it a blessing to have a prostitute in the immediate family.

Wed, 07/21/2010 - 13:10 | 481089 lizzy36
lizzy36's picture

so i am guessing your mail order bride didn't work out to well.

Wed, 07/21/2010 - 13:25 | 481122 Bam_Man
Bam_Man's picture


Wed, 07/21/2010 - 13:40 | 481158 aheady
aheady's picture


Wed, 07/21/2010 - 14:20 | 481271 malek
malek's picture

Did he order from the wrong country?

Thu, 07/22/2010 - 20:52 | 484742 Miles Kendig
Miles Kendig's picture

He placed his order with the wrong attitude.... since the size of the check was immaterial, once it passed hands

Wed, 07/21/2010 - 13:47 | 481180 SheepDog-One
SheepDog-One's picture

trav7777 I agree totaly, soon we'll see a whole lot less American entitlement princesses around.

Wed, 07/21/2010 - 14:48 | 481399 DR
DR's picture

Lol-all those Walmart princess jobs!


"In Colombia, whole families live together"


Those McMansions are going to come in handy when housing 4 generations of families.

Wed, 07/21/2010 - 12:36 | 481007 I think I need ...
I think I need to buy a gun's picture

I just got done watching "strategy session"  is that the most useless show ever? distract the people..

Wed, 07/21/2010 - 12:48 | 481043 traderjoe
traderjoe's picture

CNBS has been in full hopium mode - amping it up over the last couple of weeks as the data has turned down. 

Article on CNBC website today that said something like "bad economy is good for stocks". You can't make that sh*t up. 

Wed, 07/21/2010 - 12:36 | 481011 crzyhun
crzyhun's picture

Here' s a thought....go to and see where we as a country are on that list. Check each one to see if it applies to us.

Take a minute to reflect on your response. Then and only then reply to this post.

Wed, 07/21/2010 - 12:51 | 481050 ejmoosa
ejmoosa's picture

2,5,7,9, & 10 are in the bag.

Getting closer on the rest.


Wed, 07/21/2010 - 12:42 | 481020 TheDriver
TheDriver's picture


Thanks for posting. This is a must see video.

She is real. She is your neighbor.

This is America.

Wed, 07/21/2010 - 12:44 | 481033 Gimp
Gimp's picture

I know of a lot of laid-off people joining the military - only option left for some. Is this planned?

Talk about kicking the can down the road 2021? - assuming 166K jobs per month for the next 11 years.

Stop bogarting the joint and pass it along.

Wed, 07/21/2010 - 12:50 | 481047 traderjoe
traderjoe's picture

I haven't heard one thing from the government in the past couple of years that would approximate a proactive approach to job creation. Coupled with the more regulation, taxation, etc. coming down the pike - just don't see any job growth at all. Oh, but we will be doubling exports in 5 years...

Wed, 07/21/2010 - 12:56 | 481065 anony
anony's picture

Sure you have.  TheBamster and CONgress have initiated the FinReg program, good for ten thousand new government employees, then there's the phased in Health Care Reform program which will likely require a million new government employees, and then there's Captain Trade to deal with carbon issues should be good for another 20,000 government employees and when those people begin spending many billions of dollars that multiply and ripple out into the real economy, more millions of new jobs will be created.

You obviously don't know a thing about Spanking your Brand.

Wed, 07/21/2010 - 12:57 | 481060 poopdeville
poopdeville's picture

Edit:  Why did my comment end up here?  I was replying to Johnny Bravo, and his baby boomers retirement comment.

Except that the value of their savings has declined and will continue to decline, so that they will need to work many more years.

Wed, 07/21/2010 - 13:00 | 481077 Gimp
Gimp's picture

Uno - Great link to Huff Post on recent college grads looking for jobs.

Viewing the first four videos, theme was developing. Isha - Public Relations, Kyle -Political Science, Rory- English Major, Sam - Public Relations.

Gerald Celente commented on students graduating with "useless" degrees, he may be right. (I think people should study what they are interested in and reap the consequences)

Should students  refuse to pay back their college loans because they are unemployable?

BTW- If I remember correctly all the sorority girls were public relations majors!

Wed, 07/21/2010 - 13:10 | 481088 JR
JR's picture

Nathan Martin of Nathan's Economic Edge recently was interviewed by a European publication regarding “financial reform” via the “Dodd-Frank” bill. Below are the questions and his answers.

1 – Does the new Bill target the roots of the crisis engine?

Absolutely not!  It fails to target the debt and it fails to target derivatives—thus leverage in general will still be far too high.  The true root of the crisis was not financial in the first place!  The root of the crisis is found in our money systems and most importantly WHO controls them.  The same private organizations are in control today as were in control during America’s Great Depression.  To truly address the roots of the problem, we must address debt, derivatives, and our monetary system along with who controls it and how.

2 – What do you think are the stronger points of the new financial reform?

It is very strong if you are a central banker and wish to keep your games rolling!  It gives them more discretionary power while obscuring what is truly transpiring.  This reform does not have any strong points for the average citizen.  Placing “Consumer Protection” under the Fed, for example, is absolutely putting the fox in charge of the hen house!  The “consumer” is saturated with debt as are our governments.  This bill fails miserably once again at addressing this.

3 – What do you think are the weakest points of the Bill?

It gives discretionary power to those responsible for making the mess in the first place.  It fails to address current debt, derivatives, or the GSE’s (Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac).  It does nothing to bring gpvernment deficits under control or to right government programs that are insolvent.  In general, it fails to change the equation of WHO produces the money and how.

Additionally, the Fed now has the authority to impose new capital standards, regulate, and/or even to divert certain portions of those financial companies!  Keep in mind that the Fed is owned by the member banks!  Who are the largest shareholders in the Fed?  The largest banks, of course!  This gives those forces the power to regulate competitors or to even force them into disadvantaged capital positions—ultimately they could even force them to divest entities that the larger member banks could then pick up!  This is inexcusable and a total mess for our nation and the world.  It centralizes power further into the very hands of the organizations responsible.

True and lasting solutions will only come when we begin to think and operate outside of the central banker debt backed money box.  Inside of that box the only answers are continually growing deficits or austerity—neither is the correct solution. When neither of those work look for “other historical events,” like war, to follow and to distract.

4 – This Bill is comparable to the Blitzkrieg of the financial reform from FDR in the 1930s?

Absolutely not.  The current problems now are far larger and far more complex than then—this addresses very little that is meaningful.

5 – One of the aspects that surprised is the expected delay between Obama signature and its application.  For instance, the time to application of the so called Volcker rule goes from 15 months to more than 80 months, or even 9 years for certain aspects!  A delay between 2012 and 2022!  In practical terms, that’s almost a generation.  What kind of reform is this?

It’s not reform at all.  It is meant to look like the politicians are taking action while actually doing nothing but turning over more power and control to the central banks.  The Dodd-Frank bill has gaps you could fly a Boeing 747 through.  The economy is far more fragile than anyone wants to admit, so they are purposely not taking any action now so that they can hopefully not have to address another steep downturn on their watch.  They will fail in that regard as another steep downturn is rapidly approaching and in fact is already in progress.

A debt saturation crisis moves in 3 waves—A,B,C.  We have experienced A down (late ’07 to March ’09), B up, and now C down has likely begun as the debt has not been cleared.  Wave C down is the wave that brings about real and meaningful change and will cleanse the debts restoring historical income to debt ratios. The Dodd-Frank bill is not it – I believe that meaningful reform will not come for some time still, but that time is approaching.  As events continue to unfold the people will become more aware of how they have been deceived.

Wed, 07/21/2010 - 13:13 | 481094 trav7777
trav7777's picture

So we just gotta grow like 5% per year, huh?  Sounds like NO PROBLEMO

Wed, 07/21/2010 - 14:04 | 481218 carbonmutant
carbonmutant's picture

"Somewhat slower than projected..." Bernanke


Wed, 07/21/2010 - 14:30 | 481310 walküre
walküre's picture

Does their 'math' consider the fact that people will work much longer than before?

Freedom 85 anyone?

Wed, 07/21/2010 - 14:52 | 481415 Johnny Bravo
Johnny Bravo's picture

That chart with the two trendlines intersecting in 2021 looks kind of like the trendlines on the AU chart, only the AU chart's is steeper.

Wed, 07/21/2010 - 15:51 | 481621 RockyRacoon
RockyRacoon's picture

Chart, chart, chart.  You need some new tools.  Black swans anyone?

When your only tool is a hammer, everything looks like a nail.

Wed, 07/21/2010 - 16:01 | 481644 Zina
Zina's picture

U-3 unemployment below 7% ?

It will take a looooong time before you'll see that again! IF you see that again...

There's no doubt U-3 unemployment will be above 9% by mid-2011, one year from now.

Wed, 07/21/2010 - 17:30 | 481930 The Alarmist
The Alarmist's picture

At some point the last of the Boomers will retire, and every spare body in the third world will be imported to feed, bathe, and care for them.  But it won't be enough, so jobs will finally need to be filled with native born americans, assuming of course that, unlike greys, the have not lost their capacity to physically move things after all those years online.

Wed, 07/21/2010 - 17:45 | 481968 Grand Supercycle
Wed, 07/21/2010 - 18:45 | 482104 sgt_doom
sgt_doom's picture

Thanks for a really positive post!!!

I had extrapolated a return to pathetic employment levels by 2030, if America is extremely lucky!!!

Man oh man!  To hear it may happen by 2021 brings tears to my old, crusty eyes.....

Wed, 07/21/2010 - 21:14 | 482367 Opinionated Blo...
Opinionated Bloviator's picture

Ah hopium, the new opiate of the masses. The problem is, assuming Jamie Dimon's prediction of a new financial crisis every 5-7 years holds up, by 2013-2015 the next Wall Street bailout will be upon us (happy day's are here again). When that happens all bets are off, although my money is on Hobbesian social meltdown. The United States of Argentina - it's certainly change and you will believe it when it arrives shortly.


Wed, 07/21/2010 - 21:25 | 482387 Robert J Moran
Robert J Moran's picture

We need a good, virulent, fast acting plague!

Do NOT follow this link or you will be banned from the site!