The economy lost a net 63,000 jobs in February, the sharpest drop in five years. The losses appear mostly linked to the continued housing crisis. Some expect the Federal Reserve to respond by lowering interest rates again, perhaps by as much as a full point.
Registered?
Commenting on WE Blog now requires you to be a Kansas.com member. Use the links above to register, if you haven't already, or to log in.Contact us
Follow us
Daily Archives
-
Recent Comments
- cosmos_originally on Death penalty review promised
- Daniel on Open thread 11/8
- Boxlock20 on Open thread 11/8
- oliveoyl on Roberts already wants a fourth term
- Boxlock20 on Open thread 11/8
- Daniel on Open thread 11/8
- satatom on Open thread 11/8
- satatom on Shooting is tragic, terrible
- Regular on Open thread 11/8
- Phantom on Open thread 11/8
124 Comments
Further rate cuts will, IMHO, not do a lot for the current situation in the economy unless lenders are willing to lend, and this only applies if there are borrowers wanting to borrow. Given the loss of jobs, the 450,000 that have “quit looking” in the past month, it would seem that we’ve got much farther to travel before there is an upturn. Oh, there’s also this stafglation thing…
The business cycle is, well, cyclical. Cutting interest rates, giving tax rebates etc… just prolongs the pain. The sooner the recession bottoms out, the sooner we can start moving out of it.
Oh yes, lowering the rate an additional point and see the dollar weaken even more. The dollar is the lowest it’s ever been and lowering the rate more will help it become even more worthless. That should help the oil prices climb even further.
Looks like Republicans got us in a huge pickle with their experienced, fiscally conservative politicians.
outlander, agreed. That’s why I didn’t like the first round of cuts, the tax rebates; these just serve to prolong and worsen the recession, IMO.
The unemployment rate in Kansas is around 4%.
What’s wrong with that?
Clinton’s economy created about a quarter-million jobs every month.
Bush’s ecomony just lost 63,000 jobs.
Thank God that the RepubliCONs are so much better at managing the economy. Just think how terrible it’d have been with a Democratic president . . .
:roll:
It will take some hard decision and some every harder course changes. The United States has given too much away. And operated too long like a venture Capitalist, not building but more selling off pieces for a profit. Jobs, manufacturing and assets and the chickens have came home to roost. The thought of lowering interest rates and the whole idea of the rebates. Shows more a lack of understanding a strong economy than supporting one.
Fleetwood–
Of course, our jobless rate is low.
Why the H E double-hockey sticks would anybody stay in Kansas if you didn’t have a job to force you to live here . . .
BTW, every time the Fed drops the interest rate, the dollar TANKS against foreign currencies, because they don’t want to invest in dollar denominated securities.
We’re slowly becoming Argentina, mired in debt with a sinking currency . . .
At least my precious metals investments are growing, can’t say that about my stocks which have plummeted. I expect them to go up in 2008 when a fiscally responsible Democrat (oops, being redundant) is fairly elected.
The jobless rate isn’t very accurate. When I was unemployed I didn’t register as jobless since I didn’t draw unemployment. When I got a new job it was for four hours a week but that qualifies as being employed. When a person works three jobs it counts like three people working one job each, thereby inflating the numbers.
What is the percentage of unemployed and underemployed counting in those who aren’t receiving unemployment benefits?
Doug, from the link I posted this morning, it is estimated at 8.9%. The methodology used in arriving at that figure is given within the piece, IIRC.
Presidents have very very little to do with the economy.
What policy did Clinton ever push for, what law did Bill Clinton ever sign, that had anything to do with the overall economy?
Most of the Federal Budget is entitlement spending, things that we have to do, because of laws passed over the course of our entire existance as a country.
Actually, the George W. Bush administration had one of the longest periods of job growth in the nations history. Something like 52 months of increasing employment.
Vaughn,
That’s a higher rate than Canada whose dollar has increased in comparison to ours. Funny how socialist Canada is able to have universal health care, lower unemployment, attract US manufacturing jobs, be an energy exporter, etc and yet have a stronger economy than the United States.
That sort of thing happens when you don’t spend over 50% of your budget on military expenses. It’s sad to think millions are going to vote for McCain so this downward economic spiral will continue.
Paul, I like how you manage to contradict yourself in the same post. Congrats, that must take some talent.
The investor class is doing REAL well.
That is why for everyone else it pretty much sucks.
SO bush has done what he was intended to do for the haves and have mores.
Right, Econ.
Most of that job growth was the increased spending of the federal gov’t (see jobs for “security guards” in Iraq) which has nearly doubled our national debt.
But by your own standards, the job growth under Bush was not due to Bush.
JR,
What exactly is the “investor class?”
Just about anyone can invest and many people do.
KILLER NUMBERS!!!
KILLER NUMBERS!!!
KILLER NUMBERS!!!
LOOK OUT!!! WARNING!!!
KILLER NUMBERS!!!
The “poor deadbeat Liberal” class is suffering as usual.
Locked in poverty by their own laziness and reliance on Government to take care of the helpless and hopeless.
Obama is the only HOPE we have to CHANGE America!
Capn
HUH?
How can you possibly say that most of the job growth was due to government jobs, or increased government spending?
Show me the study to support such wild claims, would you?
—–
Also, most of our budget is NOT defense spending. Social spending and entitlement spending make up the majority of our government expenses.
“The investor class is doing REAL well.”
You said it, jr. Now can you explain how that is true? Be careful. The answer is not what your Lib mind thinks.
Ummm,
What’s the unemployment rate by year for the last say 15 years?
From Yahoo/AP News:
Congress passed and Bush signed a stimulus package that will send tax rebates to many families and businesses. But some fear it will come too late — or that people will use the money to save or pay off debt, rather than go on a spending spree that would boost the economy.
Bush gently urged people to do the latter. “When the money reaches the American people, we expect they will use it to boost consumer spending,” he said.
It’s too bad we’ve had to endure a president who never wanted for anything. Dubya got himself in financial trouble, and Daddy and Daddy’s friends bailed him out. He has NO IDEA what it is to work for a living, to be without a job, or to have to stretch a (tanking) dollar to make ends meet. This is a man who didn’t know the price of GASOLINE.
So what’s he going to say when people use that tax rebate “to save or pay off debt, rather than go on a spending spree that would boost the economy”? Throw a tantrum and demand it be given back?
George the Clueless
“Average hourly earnings for jobholders rose to $17.80 in February, a 0.3 percent increase from the previous month.”
More killer economic news. Not a bad average, eh?
fleettwood, an increase below the inflation rate, IIRC; also, the number of payroll jobs decreases; not something to trumpet, IMO.
The highest unemployment rate in Kansas was 7.4% in September, 1982.
The low was 2.9% in October of 1978
In December of 2007 it was 4.4%
At least the democrat congress got the minimum wage through.
RD,
You mean that check your party supported as well?
Actually, the George W. Bush administration had one of the longest periods of job growth in the nations history. Something like 52 months of increasing employment.
Was that before or after jobs hit the skids? Because when you’re at the bottom, the only way is up. And, please, tell that to the people in Michigan and Pennsylvania, where job loss hit the hardest.
What is the percentage of unemployed and underemployed counting in those who aren’t receiving unemployment benefits?
And that’s what the Right doesn’t want to look at. I’ve been saying since the first of the big job losses began that there’s a rising number of underemployed as a result.
Doug, from the link I posted this morning, it is estimated at 8.9%.
VT, that’s in addition to the 4% or 5% being reported?
Nathan,
If you were a Democrat in Congress, would YOU have voted it down? Kinda like the no-funding of the war. Everyone knows what the Republicans would have done with either.
The point is, that rebate isn’t going to be used for what Bush and others are hoping it will be. Just the fact that Congress feels the need to “buoy” the economy with a b.s. tax rebate that it can’t afford is a clear indication of what’s really going on.
RD, that includes it. Some time ago, I read an article somewhere (should have bookmarked it, doggone it; think it was Slate) that demonstrated the continuing spread between the “official” unemployment rate and the unemployment/underemployment rate. The first is based upon the numbers filing for unemployment, looking for work, etc.; the second is based upon a household survey, measuring not only those measured by the first one, but also those whose unemployment benefits have “run out” but still don’t have a job; those who have taken a part time job(s), but are looking for full time employment; those who have started their own business but would accept a full time job; domestic employees; and other such folks. Both sets of numbers are kept by the BLS, but it is the “official” ones that are reported in the media.
Headline in Toronto Newspaper to-day: Economy ADDS 43,000, betch all of them have to accept health insurance too. Tighten the border before whatever they’re doing leaks south, stop this tundra madness!
RD,
Please don’t pretend like I don’t pay any attention to the news.
Your party didn’t just go along with it.
Nancy Pelosi was on the news speaking on how great it would be!
Sorry, try again RD.
Nancy Pelosi:
“It is there to strengthen the middle class, to create jobs and to turn this economy around.”
http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/01/24/economic.stimulus/index.html
Meanwhile, with oil over $100 we are also seeing inflation growing. STAGFLATION anyone?
You’re doing a heckuva job Georgie!
This is much ado about nothing – President Bush says that we are not in a recession and that we are not headed for one, either. According to the Prez, everything is just hunky dory and we should all just go back to watching Lost and Prison Break.
Everyone knows that President George W Bush does NOT lie.
Except when he does.
This “spread” has held at a fairly consistent 5% or so over the past five years.
For those more versed in the way the feds report these things, I’ve a question: when there is a report of jobs created, does this include part time jobs, folks starting their own businesses, etc., or is this limited solely to full time jobs. My reason for this query is that there seems to be a number of part time jobs available in various employment sectors, but fewer full time jobs available. If the number includes the part time, etc., jobs, then while the quantity thereof might be impressive, the quality isn’t, especially where the job losses being reported are full time, some with benefits, being replaced by part time jobs, without benefits in many cases. Thus, if X thousand full time jobs are replaced by 2X part time jobs, there could be a negative effect economically, even though it could be reported that 2X jobs were created.
I’ve done some quick and dirty Google searches in the past, and, likely due to the error in framing the search terms, haven’t really found an answer which provided a satisfactory explanation.
Again, why are you complaining about gas prices Ben?
Just drive less, conserve more, and you will be ok.
Nathan, as I’ve speculated publicly before, the fact that this is an election year guaranteed support for it. I’ve also speculated that if this was not an election year, such proposal would not have been made.
Vaughn,
My point is that it is absurd to simply blame Bush or mock Bush for something that the Democrats were supporting and saying the same things about.
Nathan, good suggestion to Ben (not). Now, how do you propose to modify the increases in food costs relating to increased costs in production and transportation due to increased fuel costs? What about increased costs of other materials which are manufactured elsewhere and shipped here, say paper; books; etc., the cost of which has also been affected by increased fuel costs in the same manner?
Killer numbers. I received a raise this year. That raise was above 5%, but below 10%. I got that raise because I made myself more valuable an employee.
Killer numbers. Yes. Oh, I work in the aerospace industry. Admittedly, a higher paying industry than many. I got that by working to make myself eligible for such a job. By going to school, part time, in the evenings, with a full time job. Killer numbers. Yes.
Nathan, I’m mocking them all.
Nathan,
What VT said. :)
Hey, I’ll admit it’ll be nice to get the rebate, but I’d rather have a stronger economy overall. Wouldn’t you?
VT,
Thanks for the explanation. So that would figure, using the 4.4% of Kansas only, that half is “reported”, while half isn’t. Or, put another way, the unemployment rate is double what’s being announced. ;)
Thanks VT – as noted the place where this is hitting me is at the grocery store.
littlejohn, good for you. Now, if the inflation rate is above the rate of increase in your salary, have you really gained anything? Again, not trying to start any arguments here; obviously, you’re better off than if you hadn’t received the increase.
Vaughn,
Don’t get me wrong, I am all for doing a multitude of things like more drilling, more refining, and protecting our oil interests around the world.
It is usually the Democrats here who cry about a war for oil, don’t support drilling, and demand only more conservation.
So everytime a Democrat or liberal complains about the price of Gas, I am going to tell them to simply conserve more Gas.
In almost any discussion we have, that is the only solution they give.
So do it.
RD,
I don’t think the check makes much sense, I will use it to start reloading because of the price of ammo.
My POINT was that your comments going after Bush were just pure plain old partisan BS. Your party supported it too. You don’t get to simply blame Bush for this one and mock him when Nancy Pelosi is out there saying the same crap he was.
I’ve heard two different ways the unemployment is counted.
The first, as I’d always heard, is through counting unemployment benefits being given. The second I heard in the past 4 or 5 years is the following which I copied and pasted at the time from an article.
“The unemployment rate is calculated from a survey of around 60,000 households in which people are asked to state whether they have jobs or are looking for work.”
I’m assuming, VT, that this is what you meant by what is kept by the BLS? Or rather, the way the BLS gets the figures? To be honest, at the time, it confused me. But then I live in the state of Confusion. (No snide comments needed from Nathan.)
I’d thought dow 12000 might hold, guess not.
Nathan,
Who dreamed up the tax rebate? Bush and his administration or Congress? As VT said and I agree with, it’s an election year. Most in Congress are not going to slit their own wrists. Pity.
Enjoy your spending spree!
Obviously, my income from what I have chosen as my profession is adversely affected by a decrease in the discretionary incomes of clients who are paying more for food, fuel, utilities, etc. Yes, I notice increased costs for paper (unfortunately, I use a lot of dead trees in what I do) perhaps more than some others. Given that all the services I offer are highly discretionary to potential clients, any negatives in the economy, local or national, affect me.
The part of the economy that affects my clients and thus me is in worse shape, IMO, than the “official” numbers. I don’t think I’m alone here. Yes, I chose to do what I do, and at my advance age, likely have few options to change, even if I wanted to. I’m sure Econ has noticed, too.
And, we’ll be doing what President Bush has asked; spend the rebate to help finance our trip to our daughter’s commencement, although in a perfect world, I’d rather save it.
The fact that Econ can ask this question makes me glad I don’t intrust any money with him:
Capn
HUH?
How can you possibly say that most of the job growth was due to government jobs, or increased government spending?
Show me the study to support such wild claims, would you?
Sheesh, where’ve you been?
Forecasters see strong economic growth in 2004
Tuesday, November 25, 2003 – 12:00 AM
Martin Crutsinger THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
WASHINGTON — The U.S. economy, primed by tax cuts and low interest rates, should grow next year at the fastest pace in two decades, but that will do little to decrease unemployment, top economic forecasters predicted Monday.
. . .
The forecasting panel saw payroll employment rising by 1.1 percent, or about 1.3 million workers, not enough to replace the 2.3 million jobs that have been lost since Bush took office in January 2001.
*****
The only reason Bush didn’t see a net job loss in his first term was because he created 880,000 new federal jobs.
Otherwise, he and Hoover would have shared that job-loss distinction.
RD, as best I can; the first example you give at 3:04 is a simple explanation of the “official” figures; the second is the unemployment/underemployment rate. Both are computed by the BLS. BTW, I think the household survey is taken of around 400,000 these days (from memory).
BTW, Econ’s claims that gov’t spends more on “entitlement” spending is true as far as it goes. It also COLLECTS more in entitlement taxes that pay for those entitlements. That’s why we still have a surplus of Social Security taxes paid in compared to what is getting paid out.
The military budget on the other hand is an entirely different matter. Huge, massive, deficits.
2 billion a week on Iraq alone . . .
Vaughn tolle-
I believe I am still above the inflation rate, though I haven;t looked it up, and I do understand your point. My point was that dollars are still there to be had, good living is there still to be made. It takes some work, but it is still there. I have been down, I have been been broke. I have ben laid off. Broke is a condidition. Poor is an attitude. One that keeps a lot of people down.
lj, sometimes I’m a bit dense on Friday afternoons; understand your point, and agree therewith.
“, I work in the aerospace industry.”
I hope you get to retire before your job is outsourced.
RD,
You are so blinded by your partisan hate for Bush it is sad.
Nancy Pelosi was the lead sponsor for the rebate checks. Her website touts how great it is.
Of the 14 other sponsors 10 were Democrats.
I’m sorry you just can’t see that the Democrats were not just going along with it begrudgingly because the President introduced it or asked for it. They were behind him the whole way as cheerleaders!
Yet you sit here with that initial post of yours mocking the President as if he shoved it down Congress throats and they had to go along…
Give me a break.
Kerry said Bush “has presided over an economy where we’ve lost 1.6 million jobs. The first president in 72 years to lose jobs. I have a plan to put people back to work. That’s not wishy-washy.” A government report Friday said the nation had lost 821,000 jobs under Bush.
Deseret News (Salt Lake City), Oct 9, 2004 by Nedra Pickler Associated Press
“You are so blinded by your partisan hate for Bush it is sad.”
RD might have partisan hatred of Bush, but mine is just your garden variety, run of the mill hatred for a guy that has done more damage to the United States than any president in history.
But that’s just my opinion.
Sure got quiet from Econ now that I proved my “wild claim,” didn’t it.
Don’t worry, he’ll never admit that he was wrong.
That would be the honest thing to do. As a CON, he’s the antithesis of honest . . .
Thanks, VT, on the unemployment count method.
And I hear ya, loud and clear, on the discretionary income thing. In my tiny corner of the world, women are the buyers (”clients” in your world), and women in a 2-person household are usually the first to sacrifice “extras” for food and such. December sales are always the lowest of the year, meaning people are buying gifts for others, instead of the gift of reading for themselves.
“BTW, Econ’s claims that gov’t spends more on “entitlement” spending is true as far as it goes. It also COLLECTS more in entitlement taxes that pay for those entitlements. That’s why we still have a surplus of Social Security taxes paid in compared to what is getting paid out.
The military budget on the other hand is an entirely different matter. Huge, massive, deficits.”
—————–
Talk about a distinction w/o a difference. Money spent is money spent, whether specific taxes are collected for it or not. All spending contributes to the bottom line.
Nathan,
For the gazillionth time, I don’t hate. Not George Bush, not anyone. Intensely dislike, yes. Think he is wrong for this country and has been since day one, yes. Agree with what WSClark said, yes. And it has nothing to do with partisanship, although if you want to believe it, go right ahead.
My “blind hatred of Bush” as you call it is in response to his blindness to reality in many areas. It’s pretty simple to see that his “haves and have mores” comment was from the heart and made by someone who IS CLUELESS. I would think a Christian such as yourself would take offense to his cluelessness. And I’m not bringing religion into the arena to argue about it, so don’t even try. But if Christians believe they should emulate Christ (hence the name “Christians”), there are some doing a very poor job of it.
And Pelosi was wrong. But I’ll spend my check because I’ll be one of the many paying for it.
With the depressing job numbers coming out the last few months, I suspect a great deal of the money rebate will be used to pay bills, for fuel, or saved for bleaker days acomin.
The Nathan plan. Drive less; Eat less.
“A government report Friday said the nation had lost 821,000 jobs under Bush”
How did Bush accomplish such a feat?
Is Globalization Bush’s fault? If so, how?
I guess Obama and Hillary have the fix in place since they are by definition not the man who is blamed for all the country’s woes?
So what is the fix?
So which is going to bring back jobs the quickest?
Nationalized Hillarycare?
Obama’s quick withdrawl from Iraq?
Obama’s willingness to talk to Castro?
Hillary’s subprime bailout for overextended wannabe homeowners?
Is Hope going to bring back jobs?
Just wondering.
September 2007 Marks Record 49th Consecutive Month of Job Growth
More Than 8.1 Million Jobs Created Since August 2003 In Longest Continuous Months Of Job Growth On Record
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2007/10/20071005-3.html
Personally, I don’t think a president has a whole lot of control oever the economy. But if you want to blame Bush, then you gotta give him credit too.
Why would you start with 8/03 if you’re evaluating bush job growth record?
I dunno Phantom. Maybe because it’s month number 1 in the longest recorded string of continuous monthly job growth stats?
Or maybe that’s when the fallout from 911 had subsided enough that jobs numbers meant anything.
That’s my guess.
Maybe because you don’t count the crappy numbers that came before 8/03.
Talk about a distinction w/o a difference. Money spent is money spent, whether specific taxes are collected for it or not. All spending contributes to the bottom line.
*****
Totally false. Taxes for highway funds are paid by dedicated taxes on gasoline for instance.
Spending that results in deficit is very different that spending that doesn’t.
It’s called “pay as you go.”
RepubliCONs pretend not to understand it because it doesn’t justify tax cuts for the rich . . .
Presidents have very very little to do with the economy.
Except when they engage in worthless trillion-dollar wars.
As Paul Harve might say; ‘Now for the rest of the story’ http://www.senate.gov/comm/jec/general/charts/be_talkingpoints.pdf
Macro economic decisions and actions have no impact on the micro economy, if one is to believe the republicans.
capn– Pleased to be wondering what is “rich”, in your opinion?
“A government report Friday said the nation had lost 821,000 jobs under Bush”
rfl, the above says UNDER Bush. Is that difficult to understand? Was it personally his fault? That depends on which side you’re on. ;)
Don’t blame the Dems for dissing Bush and laying blame at his door. The Repubs did and are still doing the same with Clinton (Bill, that is).
Works both ways, ya know. :)
That quote RD was from 2004 so it’s not relevant today. Not sure why Capn posted it, but at least he made the date known.
Maybe because you don’t count the crappy numbers that came before 8/03.
Maybe Nathan can answer a question I have, since he’s Marine Reserve. Is a reservist, not deployed, considered a “job”? Is deployment as a reservist considered “employed”?
When we have the answer to that, we may have the answer to why the above happened.
Or not. But I’m curious, nonetheless.
outlander,
Dated or not dated, I thought your point was about Bush being responsible. I just pointed out the “under”, not the number of jobs.
If this had happened “under” Clinton, are you telling me that you wouldn’t be blaming him?
Tit for tat, my friend. :)
“Tit for tat, my friend.”
Which serves what purpose exactly?
RD, I think that Nathan, albeit in the Marine Reserves, isn’t the best source for an answer to your question (with all due respect to Nathan). The question you have is one that relates to the definitions used by BLS as to what does “job” mean.
I’ll hazard a bit of a guess here; an undeployed member of the Reserves, regardless of branch, who is not now “activated” is, as to his or her Reserve status, not holding a job. Such member of the Reserves would, IMO, be counted as having a “job” if employed at his/her regular civilian employment.
Just a guess, RD. Nathan, all perceived kidding aside, if you know the answer, I, too, would appreciate your sharing the same with us.
“Dated or not dated, I thought your point was about Bush being responsible”
———-
Actually, just the opposite RD.
outlander, I believe Capn posted that in rebuttal to a point made by Econ earlier. I’m too lazy to scroll up to confirm this, however.
The point all are making is, as I see it, that there is little to nothing a President does which directly affects the economy, the number of jobs created, etc. While the President’s policies may have some small effect, he (to date) really has no power over the economy as a whole. This does not, however, prevent blame (or credit) being assigned to the President for political purposes.
Reservists and Guardsmen are considered citizen/soldiers until they are on active duty.
So any statistics for employment, is gathered on their civilian status.
Can someone explain to me why my house would jump in appraised value nearly 30k in one year? especially during this housing crisis?
Regular, thanks.
So follow-up question: When a Reservist/Guard member goes on active duty, is this counted as a “new” job (albeit federal)? Next follow-up question: If the answer to the first question is “yes”, then When the Reservist/Guard member is deactivated, is this a “job loss”?
Actually, just the opposite RD.
You’re right, outlander. I worded that incorrectly.
———–
Regular, thanks for the answer. That’s what I was thinking.
So if deployed on active duty, say, in Iraq, they would then be considered employed for employment statistics, right?
(You’d think I’d know all this. My ex was KANG for 20 years. But because 14 of those were also Civil Service at McConnell…)
P_M; due to sales of comparable housing since the last “reappraisal”, most of which occurred prior to the loss of value in the real estate market, and which, BTW, has not yet be felt in Kansas as it has in other parts of the country.
P_Mom,
Yours and everybody else’s, from what I hear. Doesn’t make a lick of common sense, does it?
VT, you beat me to the rest of the questions.
RD, while it doesn’t appear to “make a lick of common sense”, given how the annual reappraisals are done under the statutes governing same, the valuation for 2008 purposes is based, at a minimum, on sales data from 2007, during which time, in Wichita, at least, sales continued strong well into the fourth quarter.
P-M, may I suggest you appeal? The instructions on how this is done are (hopefully) on the valuation notice.
That’s insane truly. I live fairly rural, but close enough to big cities that housing isn’t too bad where I live.
My house was appraised at 64k last year.
This year, 92k.
There is NO way my house is worth no 92k. It’s also worth more than 64k. Who knows. 80k would seem about right.
And since we’re discussing the economy, it appears the USAF didn’t have that in mind when awarding the tanker deal. For once I agree with Tiarht: “I think when Americans understand that we’ve given the French jobs with taxpayer dollars instead of Kansas jobs; they are going to be upset.”
I certainly will be appealing VT, I already knew that was gonna happen when I opened it and my jaw dropped.
Congressman Tiahrt should remember that there will be additional jobs in Alabama.
IIRC, the number of direct jobs for Wichita was estimated to be 500 at the top end, with up to another 500 in related jobs, making a total of 1000 if Boeing had secured the contract. Not an insubstantial number, but Everett, WA took a hit here, too. Mobile is, again from memory, expecting 300-500, maybe more.
I would also point out, P_M, that rural values are still going up due to the increased grain prices. Do appeal; it may well be a beneficial use of the time.
Oh, P_M, a cautionary note: be careful how you answer the following question (if asked); “Would you sell your house for $92,000 if someone offered to pay you that for it?”. If you say “Yes”, well, then you have just determined the value as it is theoretically that which a willing seller would accept from a willing buyer. Hopefully, those kind of questions aren’t asked, although once upon a time…
Active Duty military status is an odd thing. The Federal Government does a head count of those assigned to a military reservation and derives statistics from them.
For instance, those living in base housing are used in a formula to subsidize the local school district as the housing units are not legally part of the county they are located in.
So, if there are no physically based schools on the installation, the monies would go to the local school district from the Federal Government.
The bureau of labor and statistics lump Federal employees and military into separate pots, but they are all still counted in overall statistics for employment, tax purposes and etc.
Contractors are a curious sort, as they often slip through several cracks in the system as do seasonal workers. Although, I think they have a better handle on it than they used to.
IIRC, the number of direct jobs for Wichita was estimated to be 500 at the top end, with up to another 500 in related jobs, making a total of 1000 if Boeing had secured the contract.
But I’m selfish, and even a few hundred sounds good to greedy people like me. :)
#
Vaughn Tolle
Posted March 7, 2008 at 4:56 pm | Permalink
Regular, thanks.
So follow-up question: When a Reservist/Guard member goes on active duty, is this counted as a “new” job (albeit federal)? Next follow-up question: If the answer to the first question is “yes”, then When the Reservist/Guard member is deactivated, is this a “job loss”?
————————-
It’s a sector related job and is classified as such.
It’s a job loss, but only for that ’sector’ if you know what I mean. Appropriated funded employment count pretty much as other jobs do, the lag in accountability is questionable as I’ve seen entire bases deactivated and the money keeps pouring in via the school support issue I gave earlier.
BTW, military retirement is considered unemployed. :)
Regular, knew about the counting of military retired as unemployed :-). Knew about “impact funds” that you posted about earlier, would have thought there would have been less lag time on cessation. Understand the “sector” classification. Thanks, Regular.
Ahhh the next bubble, land values go up because of crop prices, farmers borrow on the escalated value, to enlarge their operation. Crop prices go down, farmers move to the city.
There’s also been a lot of talk the past several days in the Wall Street Journal about a “margin spiral.” I remember this in the halcyon glow otherwise known as my bidness skool dayz…but I never ever thought we might actually HAVE one.
This particular margin spiral is caused when hedged and other options funds borrow a fraction of the asset value of real estate (called “buying it on the margin,” firms like Carlyle Capital “own” RE assets valued at roughly $27 billion while holding aggregated liabilities, or “margin loans,” for same at something like $26.3 billion: ie, these assets are leveraged roughly 32 times). What’s happening now in many securities markets is that Wall Street has in effect added what amounts to a 3.5% premium to mortgage-backed debt securities…that’s 3.5% in ADDITION TO what’s already factored into these securities for default risk. In other words, the cost of money loaned to purchase real estate has been raised by 3.5%, and this price increase has nothing to do with market forces. In fact, the cost of non-mortgage money is actually falling. It’s just added due to a repricing of the risk involved in making such loans.
The net effect is that RE asset prices (including securities) have fallen as the cost of leverage dollars has risen. As these asset prices fall, banks with large margin loans run their spreadsheets and see that, due to falling asset prices, they need less exposure. They call in all or part of their margin loans…which leads to asset dumping for the affected borrowers…which leads to further lowering of asset prices…which leads to further margin calls….which leads to more asset dumping…you get the drift. Voila, a margin spiral.
This is really beginning to look ugly, folks.
Herein lies a film worthy of watching. Do you want to understand our financial situation? Then please spend the next hour and a half learning!
If they lower it much more, they will be at Zero
Can someone explain to me why my house would jump in appraised value nearly 30k in one year? especially during this housing crisis?
Tax on Vemonists?
Ha ha. too many whiskeys.
Venomists.
Screwed my own pun up. I was so proud of it too.
It’s all ‘doom and gloom’! Right? Maybe Wrong!
Now’s the time to start getting into, or back into, the equity markets while everybody is getting out and running scared.
You prosper by buying low and selling high, not the other way around.
Why would they ask such an insane question? If someone offered me a million dollars for my house, I’d take it too, but I can promise it’s not worth it.
The crisis we face. If not responded to, the crisis our children and grandchildren face:
http://www.concordcoalition.org/events/fiscal-wake-up/fiscal-wake-up-call.htm
We need to do what is right.
Gas at $3.15. Is this the highest we’ve seen? I can’t remember.
I continue to hold to my prediction of $3.50 by Memorial Day.
RD,
Just drive less and conserve.
Everything will be fine in 10 years or so if you support alternatives. Until then, just drive less and conserve!
Nathan,
I’m past the age of needing to prove something with jackrabbit stops and starts. I drive the speed limit. I turn off my engine while waiting on long trains. I avoid fast food places where I know a wait is inevitable or I’ll go inside. I keep my car tuned (or rather my son-in-law does) and my tires aired up. Of the ten or so points Regular listed the other day, I adhere to the majority of them. Those I don’t really don’t apply to me.
I only drive when I have to. Seriously. For 24 years, I only drove the 25 miles into Wichita every two weeks for groceries and errands. Combining errands and stops is ingrained in me. It’s a habit. Honestly, I don’t even like to drive all that much anymore. Too many loonies on the streets.
If I could buy a newer car with better MPG or a hybrid, I would. When the weather gets better, I’ll walk more often, but I have been known to walk to grab a few groceries when there’s snow on the ground. I’ve done and am doing all I can.
In 10 years, I won’t care. I do care now.
It isn’t just the gas I use or the gas you use. The price affects nearly every facet of our lives. And all I hear is “drive less and conserve”.
Pmom, I suspect your appraised value went up because the county needed the money and in an election year, they dont want to raise the mil levy so they raise the appraised value?
Yeah, I know about lag time, but it seems to be as good an explanation as any.
And the farmer’s borrowing against increased equity and then going under when the crop prices dropped or there was no production for a few years, or the BANK went under… and then farmers moving to the city…
That hit its heyday under St. Ronnie Ray Gun. Does ANYONE remember the foreclosures from the early to mid 80’s? And.. btw.. out here, the land goes up because HUNTERS from the city are buying it and little farmsteads. NOT because of crop prices. Although most of them do turn around and rent the land to local farmers for cash rent.
Hee hee hee Doug:
“That’s a higher rate than Canada whose dollar has increased in comparison to ours. Funny how socialist Canada is able to have universal health care, lower unemployment, attract US manufacturing jobs, be an energy exporter, etc and yet have a stronger economy than the United States.”
Maybe God has blessed them because they sanction GAY MARRIAGE?
Geez, even THAT couldnt bring the Canadians down.
“ksfarmgrrl” posits –
“Maybe God has blessed them because they sanction GAY MARRIAGE?
“Geez, even THAT couldnt bring the Canadians down.”
Okay. That’s funny.
Especially funny in light of last night’s “Bill Moyer’s Journal” on PBS, with John Sidney McCain the Third’s spiritual advisor John Hagee declaring that God smite Hurricane Katrina on New Orleans to cancel a gay pride parade.
Hee hee hee Monkeyhawk.
I’m glad you appreciate my WICKED funny bone. You should see the stuff I DONT post…
Didn’t McCain denounce these guys four years ago? So hard to remember, he once denounced torture too. The only thing he’s consistent on is mentioning how he doesn’t know anything about economics.
I hope Wichita remembers that he, along with Roberts and Brownback, voted to ship the tanker jobs to France.
Crap mine is nothing compared to my friends, whose went up 63,000. That’s not what it’s valued at it WENT UP by that much.
Something is very, very wrong.
By the way gas today around here, 3.27 per gallon.