You've got a slight error in U6. You're quoting the not seasonally adjusted numbers vs. the seasonally adjusted ones.
We need to stick with SA (which is yet another interesting story, a lot of people are noticing a divergence this year, so it better all "come out in the wash" which is about February where the yr-to-yr have to cancel each other out on not seasonally adjusted vs. seasonally.
I was just working on this report, sifting through the devil, but you're seeing one of the major items I was pointing out, the labor participation rate is dropping.
So, I think I'll work on more analysis and put it as a blog post for later.
This is really bad news, although I think all of us on this site are not surprised!
There were some claiming we'd see +100k in NFP....oopsy,
so the Fed. "advisory" on low interest rates appears to me more just a warning to banks (ha ha), because they cannot raise the funds rate with such dire employment statistics.
(Can we get the term offshore outsourcing mentioned yet? ;))
And I just heard on the radio news (AP, I think) that China was awarded some contract or other for a direct, high speed rail line connecting Canada to Las Vegas.
What's wrong with this picture???????
Or maybe they'll be hiring some American gandy dancers?
Why am I getting the sneaking feeling there is a lot under the covers that will soon to be exposed?
"Economist Was Under Contract With HHS While Touting Health Reform Bill
MIT economist Jonathan Gruber, one of the leading academic defenders of health care reform, is taking heat for failing to disclose consistently that he was under contract with the Department of Health and Human Services while he was touting the Democrats' health proposals the media.
"I have never seen it disclosed that he was a paid consultant to the Obama administration," a blogger for Firedoglake wrote Friday morning. "For months I have been angry with Gruber because I thought he was simply an exaggerator whose dangerous love of the spotlight was hurting the efforts of progressives to make sure the Senate bill adopted more progressive cost control solutions. ... Now it is clear something much more sinister was at play."
I still remember the day I received my defining distaste for the previous admin. The Patriot Act had my hair in the air and then I found out about Blackwater. Still remember it.
There is so much coming at me now that I feel numb.
I feel like a feudal slave, a knave. I work, work, work to support more and more public funding. In California the defined benefit plan for public officials is unfunded to the tune of $3 trillion dollars. Its been 30 years since I last knew anyone in the private sector with a defined benefit plan. CALIPERS is in trouble but the taxpayer will bail them out.
The feudal system is growing and IMHO is going to get worse. Better start taking karate lessons because once the dollar dies society is going to get ugly.
It's sort of like the accounting method they use for unemployment stats; regardless of how high the real unemployment rate climbs, they will continue to post it at 10% or so.
Now, if they were only using the same categorical measurements they used during the Great Depression (real numbers would probably be 30% to 34%).
I would strongly wager that it's all fantasy accounting from here on in, much like those major variances in the BLS data and the discrepancies between BLS and ADP unemployment data (somehow I far more trust the ADP hard data than the massaged BLS data and there is some obvious correlated data between the hits which private healthcare insurers have taken, and continue to take (due to ongoing reduction in workforce) and that ADP data, little actual correlation to BLS "data").
With the massive securitizations backing all those private equity leveraged buyouts (many of for-profit hospitals, due around 2014, "coincidentally," of course!) together with the reduction in tax base due to unemployment, stemming from those LBOs as well as various other types of jobs offshoring, ever increasing bankruptcies, etc., all that GDP growth still appears to be ever growing debt.
It may also be construed to be a subtle warning concerning those financial institutions' exposure to interest rate derivatives and interest rate swaps as once there is any substantial increase in interest rates, another financial explosion may occur.
Can ya "stay on the case" on this? I have a sneaking feeling we're going to be seeing a lot more. Glad to see Chris Bowers writing about it as well. Open left is probably my favorite political blog.
So, he's claiming he was oblivious to this and it's just some "rogue" emailing back and forth with AIG?
I didn't catch the name on the email from the NY Fed, but I sincerely doubt something this big was being decided by some "throw under the bus" underlying.
I also believe Geithner role has been previously proved, even in past statements on the AIG payouts?
We're going to need a timeline on this one for I think we have our first scandal.
Of course no one will get fired or anything done until way late in the game.
Obama “of course” has full confidence in Geithner, Robert Gibbs, a White House spokesman, said today.
“Secretary Geithner was not involved in any of these e- mails,” Gibbs said. “These decisions did not rise to his level at the Fed.”
I guess the buck doesn't stop with president of NY Fed. These were rogue employees of NY Fed. What, Geithner wasn't aware of what was happening? Give me a break. Here's the treasury spokeswoman again:
“Geithner played no role” in decisions regarding the New York Fed’s requests to withhold data.
the issue of credibility and trust. Capitalism and markets depend on both to a large extent. When major players such as Fed and Treasury Department and the leaders of those players credibility and trust is seriously called into question it doesn't bode well for the rest of the system.
Robert you and I agree but there are still a lot of people in denial. They really are expecting change.
I had to laugh on this one because I did the same thing. "I think during the general, I voted for all sorts of 3rd parties who normally I would call the cops on if they came anywhere near my lawn! ;) kind of a protest vote thing but where I am is extreme crunchy granola land, no chance in hell of any of these actually winning."
I once lived in the land of crunchy granola and Birkenstocks. It was always a surreal experience. Kind of like walking down University Ave in Berkeley could probably whisk me back to my 1960's days of protest.
I do wonder if the people with blinders are ever going to catch onto the game. Month after month the Fed come out with headlines such as "Employers cut more jobs than expected in December." They are always "surprised". I would say they are not surprised but are more about hoping things will change. Maybe soon the Feds will start to realize that $trillions of dollars is a lot of money.
The IRR warning is a subtle way of emphasizing that the Fed knows that finance often operates somewhat independently of the real economy. The Fed is trying to balance maintaining the financial system while repairing the real economy. The financiers are not cooperating but instead are return to their old tricks and taking advantage of low rates to leverage plays, figuring that if it works they make out, and if they lose, the government ponies up.
But there's not much that the Fed can do but jawbone. The financial oligarchs have been given a free pass, and they are sure to take advantage of it, no matter what the Fed, Treasury or president say.
they expanded the write off of past years or future losses to current returns for businesses. I'm not sure the exact terms but basically one has a larger window for write offs thus lowering the business tax bill. I'm positive this was for all business entities, C-corp. to sole prop.
in terms of total revenues, what is the percentage from W2 withholdings? That will tell us a lot and with 10% official unemployment, unofficial at least 17.2%, if most revenues come from W2, well, there ya have it!
I have no idea on federal, state, sales taxes, etc. what the break down is in revenue streams, by percentage. (I guess we should get a handle on that one? I don't actually). A post TBD?
and now the banks believe nothing can touch them....if they fail, they will not fail.
I'm kind of swimming around in BLS stats....there is something "wrong with this picture" going on but nailing it down (with documentation and getting the stats right) is not easy, but I suspect we're going to get some headline buster than come March or so, turns out to be "revised" and thus "fiction".
We'll see.
Either one is pretty damn bad, lovely, banks are running around with cheap money back to their usual ponzi ways to the point is causes a warning. "now boys" "you stop that now".
I always suspected that when people realized Obama was the most incredible marketing campaign since Coca-Cola, they would be very pissed off.
Nothing like downing a bottle of High-fructose laden bubble syrup, complete with caustic chemicals on the promise it will make you feel one with the world and deliver a real warm fuzzy.
I think it was during the primaries when EP came into being. I think the site was online and active somewhere late March 2008. I think one of the reasons I got that "coding bug" to put the site together because the entire Dem field to me was a joke. There was no real candidate running who have the ability plus the policy positions to turn the country around. Even Kucinich, he has some things to me are just economic insanity. (although I usually would vote for him myself in primaries).
I wrote a few things, on policy positions, comparison contrast but I was absolutely not working on any campaigns this season. Very disappointed and additionally very disappointed from the 2006 results....you work your ass off for someone who turns around and votes the way some lobbyist wants them to on a song....you spend 6 months of your free time, a corporate lobbyist gives one cocktail party and a check. You are blown off, taken for granted and that lobbyist gets their entire "order" written up, introduced and voted yes on.
It's disgusting.
If there is a primary worth trying to get a better candidate in, I'll switch to that party so I can vote in it. Other than that, I'm not sure what any of it really means.
But yeah, that's why EP is non-partisan so we can get to the details instead of the rancor.
I think during the general, I voted for all sorts of 3rd parties who normally I would call the cops on if they came anywhere near my lawn! ;) kind of a protest vote thing but where I am is extreme crunchy granola land, no chance in hell of any of these actually winning.
The Bank for International Settlements will gather top central bankers and financiers for a meeting in Basel this weekend amid rising concern about a resurgence of the "excessive risk-taking" that sparked the financial crisis.
In its invitation, the BIS cited concerns that "financial firms are returning to the aggressive behaviour that prevailed during the pre-crisis period". The BIS, known as the central banks' bank, outlined in a restricted note to participants some proposals that it believes could create a healthier financial system. Those proposals including lowering return-on-equity targets for the banks as a way to discourage such risk-taking.
Like I said there is a difference on unfulfilled campaign promises and lying. Campaigning against big pharma and then cutting a back room deal with them is lying and dishonest. Campaigning for a 'public option' and then not even fighting for it is lying. Criticizing your opponents regarding excise taxes and supporting it over another alternative is lying. Saying that you didn't run for president to protect 'fat cat bankers' and doing the exact opposite is lying.
Yes, I would have expected the same DLC/Hamilton Project/neo-liberal bullshit from a Hillary Clinton presidency but I did not expect it from Obama.
Was I naive? Sure, but what were my options? Was I wrong for actually believing what a candidate said?
I am done with political parties. I changed my voting registration back in November to independent. As for 'left/progressive' politics - it would be better to focus on issues rather than candidates. The idea of a 'better democrat' is just not realistic.
I could see Obama would be more "Rubinite" than Hillary in the primary. So, let's say Hillary really was "Rubin light" in comparison to Obama (not to imply at all she was a real reformer here), but my criticism of the "left" is they jump onto candidates and even agendas without doing due diligence.
Even on policy, there isn't a lot of research to find out the real ramifications.
So, during the election the criticism is not only did the left do into denial on Obama's real positions, backers and votes (and policy) but there were many posts which were flat out lies and denials. Case in point is NAFTA, it was very clear from the people to the votes to the position white papers to the advisers Obama would push more bad trade agreements and not renegotiate NAFTA at all.
We had various people claim the opposite, that he would and Hillary wouldn't. Well, the fact was Hillary had more evidence she would than Obama...
so the criticism is people have to stick to policy, to legislation to the details and call it as it is and not rush onto campaign bandwagons believing a candidate is something they are not.
When they do that, they lose power to get policy changed.
The entire blogosphere, instead of going gaga for Obama, could have held out for demands on very specific policy changes and not endorsed anyone.
Same with other candidates. If you want real change, you must demand real change and on top of things one must understand what the real consequences, implications are per policy.
In term of the political front, this was a huge motivator to start EP. Not only was the idea to get more people doing citizen investigation, awareness, details, focused on economics, increase public awareness, participation ...
but to also stop the partisan endorsements, when a particular candidate really is caca, i.e. "all of the above" are caca.
Not to just jump on some bill "title", but to read the bill, understand the real economic ramifications and consequences.
We have all of these blogs, social networking, citizen communication, citizen expose, research and instead of doing proper due diligence on the details with all of these tools..
they were simply incorporated into a massive public relations/marketing agenda. That's not real change.
I mean the fight was to gain control of government and this was achieved...that was a huge rationalization. So, what does one have now? More corporate/lobbyist written legislation, same as when GOP was in control over government....and the real things that must be structurally changed are not happening.
If people were aware during the primaries there could have been much higher demands...
instead I see this as the entire left was hoodwinked with a lot of very nice sounding rhetoric.
I understand that campaigning and governing are two very different things but man come on. He was elected with a mandate for change. And what does he do right away - appoints Larry Summers - this was very disturbing to me knowing Summers background/history. Then quickly came Geithner and that was when I lost faith. I knew we were going to get the same old Clinton/DLC/Hamilton Project/neo-liberal bullshit.
Oh, sure, Obama will try to throw a few bones to people who got him elected but as long the financial oligarchy is protected at the end of the day that is what matters. There is huge difference between making campaign promises and not fulfilling them and just plain outright lying.
You've got a slight error in U6. You're quoting the not seasonally adjusted numbers vs. the seasonally adjusted ones.
We need to stick with SA (which is yet another interesting story, a lot of people are noticing a divergence this year, so it better all "come out in the wash" which is about February where the yr-to-yr have to cancel each other out on not seasonally adjusted vs. seasonally.
I was just working on this report, sifting through the devil, but you're seeing one of the major items I was pointing out, the labor participation rate is dropping.
So, I think I'll work on more analysis and put it as a blog post for later.
This is really bad news, although I think all of us on this site are not surprised!
There were some claiming we'd see +100k in NFP....oopsy,
so the Fed. "advisory" on low interest rates appears to me more just a warning to banks (ha ha), because they cannot raise the funds rate with such dire employment statistics.
(Can we get the term offshore outsourcing mentioned yet? ;))
And I just heard on the radio news (AP, I think) that China was awarded some contract or other for a direct, high speed rail line connecting Canada to Las Vegas.
What's wrong with this picture???????
Or maybe they'll be hiring some American gandy dancers?
Why am I getting the sneaking feeling there is a lot under the covers that will soon to be exposed?
"Economist Was Under Contract With HHS While Touting Health Reform Bill
MIT economist Jonathan Gruber, one of the leading academic defenders of health care reform, is taking heat for failing to disclose consistently that he was under contract with the Department of Health and Human Services while he was touting the Democrats' health proposals the media.
"I have never seen it disclosed that he was a paid consultant to the Obama administration," a blogger for Firedoglake wrote Friday morning. "For months I have been angry with Gruber because I thought he was simply an exaggerator whose dangerous love of the spotlight was hurting the efforts of progressives to make sure the Senate bill adopted more progressive cost control solutions. ... Now it is clear something much more sinister was at play."
I still remember the day I received my defining distaste for the previous admin. The Patriot Act had my hair in the air and then I found out about Blackwater. Still remember it.
There is so much coming at me now that I feel numb.
I feel like a feudal slave, a knave. I work, work, work to support more and more public funding. In California the defined benefit plan for public officials is unfunded to the tune of $3 trillion dollars. Its been 30 years since I last knew anyone in the private sector with a defined benefit plan. CALIPERS is in trouble but the taxpayer will bail them out.
The feudal system is growing and IMHO is going to get worse. Better start taking karate lessons because once the dollar dies society is going to get ugly.
It's sort of like the accounting method they use for unemployment stats; regardless of how high the real unemployment rate climbs, they will continue to post it at 10% or so.
Now, if they were only using the same categorical measurements they used during the Great Depression (real numbers would probably be 30% to 34%).
I would strongly wager that it's all fantasy accounting from here on in, much like those major variances in the BLS data and the discrepancies between BLS and ADP unemployment data (somehow I far more trust the ADP hard data than the massaged BLS data and there is some obvious correlated data between the hits which private healthcare insurers have taken, and continue to take (due to ongoing reduction in workforce) and that ADP data, little actual correlation to BLS "data").
With the massive securitizations backing all those private equity leveraged buyouts (many of for-profit hospitals, due around 2014, "coincidentally," of course!) together with the reduction in tax base due to unemployment, stemming from those LBOs as well as various other types of jobs offshoring, ever increasing bankruptcies, etc., all that GDP growth still appears to be ever growing debt.
It may also be construed to be a subtle warning concerning those financial institutions' exposure to interest rate derivatives and interest rate swaps as once there is any substantial increase in interest rates, another financial explosion may occur.
Can ya "stay on the case" on this? I have a sneaking feeling we're going to be seeing a lot more. Glad to see Chris Bowers writing about it as well. Open left is probably my favorite political blog.
So, he's claiming he was oblivious to this and it's just some "rogue" emailing back and forth with AIG?
I didn't catch the name on the email from the NY Fed, but I sincerely doubt something this big was being decided by some "throw under the bus" underlying.
I also believe Geithner role has been previously proved, even in past statements on the AIG payouts?
We're going to need a timeline on this one for I think we have our first scandal.
Of course no one will get fired or anything done until way late in the game.
And of course White House defends Geithner:
I guess the buck doesn't stop with president of NY Fed. These were rogue employees of NY Fed. What, Geithner wasn't aware of what was happening? Give me a break. Here's the treasury spokeswoman again:
What's the word - plausible deniability?
RebelCapitalist.com - Financial Information for the Rest of Us.
the issue of credibility and trust. Capitalism and markets depend on both to a large extent. When major players such as Fed and Treasury Department and the leaders of those players credibility and trust is seriously called into question it doesn't bode well for the rest of the system.
RebelCapitalist.com - Financial Information for the Rest of Us.
Robert you and I agree but there are still a lot of people in denial. They really are expecting change.
I had to laugh on this one because I did the same thing. "I think during the general, I voted for all sorts of 3rd parties who normally I would call the cops on if they came anywhere near my lawn! ;) kind of a protest vote thing but where I am is extreme crunchy granola land, no chance in hell of any of these actually winning."
I once lived in the land of crunchy granola and Birkenstocks. It was always a surreal experience. Kind of like walking down University Ave in Berkeley could probably whisk me back to my 1960's days of protest.
I do wonder if the people with blinders are ever going to catch onto the game. Month after month the Fed come out with headlines such as "Employers cut more jobs than expected in December." They are always "surprised". I would say they are not surprised but are more about hoping things will change. Maybe soon the Feds will start to realize that $trillions of dollars is a lot of money.
The IRR warning is a subtle way of emphasizing that the Fed knows that finance often operates somewhat independently of the real economy. The Fed is trying to balance maintaining the financial system while repairing the real economy. The financiers are not cooperating but instead are return to their old tricks and taking advantage of low rates to leverage plays, figuring that if it works they make out, and if they lose, the government ponies up.
But there's not much that the Fed can do but jawbone. The financial oligarchs have been given a free pass, and they are sure to take advantage of it, no matter what the Fed, Treasury or president say.
they expanded the write off of past years or future losses to current returns for businesses. I'm not sure the exact terms but basically one has a larger window for write offs thus lowering the business tax bill. I'm positive this was for all business entities, C-corp. to sole prop.
in terms of total revenues, what is the percentage from W2 withholdings? That will tell us a lot and with 10% official unemployment, unofficial at least 17.2%, if most revenues come from W2, well, there ya have it!
I have no idea on federal, state, sales taxes, etc. what the break down is in revenue streams, by percentage. (I guess we should get a handle on that one? I don't actually). A post TBD?
For general incompetence and corruption he should get a Medal of Freedom.
That's the pattern that has been set anyway.
and now the banks believe nothing can touch them....if they fail, they will not fail.
I'm kind of swimming around in BLS stats....there is something "wrong with this picture" going on but nailing it down (with documentation and getting the stats right) is not easy, but I suspect we're going to get some headline buster than come March or so, turns out to be "revised" and thus "fiction".
We'll see.
Either one is pretty damn bad, lovely, banks are running around with cheap money back to their usual ponzi ways to the point is causes a warning. "now boys" "you stop that now".
I always suspected that when people realized Obama was the most incredible marketing campaign since Coca-Cola, they would be very pissed off.
Nothing like downing a bottle of High-fructose laden bubble syrup, complete with caustic chemicals on the promise it will make you feel one with the world and deliver a real warm fuzzy.
I think it was during the primaries when EP came into being. I think the site was online and active somewhere late March 2008. I think one of the reasons I got that "coding bug" to put the site together because the entire Dem field to me was a joke. There was no real candidate running who have the ability plus the policy positions to turn the country around. Even Kucinich, he has some things to me are just economic insanity. (although I usually would vote for him myself in primaries).
I wrote a few things, on policy positions, comparison contrast but I was absolutely not working on any campaigns this season. Very disappointed and additionally very disappointed from the 2006 results....you work your ass off for someone who turns around and votes the way some lobbyist wants them to on a song....you spend 6 months of your free time, a corporate lobbyist gives one cocktail party and a check. You are blown off, taken for granted and that lobbyist gets their entire "order" written up, introduced and voted yes on.
It's disgusting.
If there is a primary worth trying to get a better candidate in, I'll switch to that party so I can vote in it. Other than that, I'm not sure what any of it really means.
But yeah, that's why EP is non-partisan so we can get to the details instead of the rancor.
I think during the general, I voted for all sorts of 3rd parties who normally I would call the cops on if they came anywhere near my lawn! ;) kind of a protest vote thing but where I am is extreme crunchy granola land, no chance in hell of any of these actually winning.
Top banks invited to BIS talks amid new risk fears
RebelCapitalist.com - Financial Information for the Rest of Us.
Like I said there is a difference on unfulfilled campaign promises and lying. Campaigning against big pharma and then cutting a back room deal with them is lying and dishonest. Campaigning for a 'public option' and then not even fighting for it is lying. Criticizing your opponents regarding excise taxes and supporting it over another alternative is lying. Saying that you didn't run for president to protect 'fat cat bankers' and doing the exact opposite is lying.
Yes, I would have expected the same DLC/Hamilton Project/neo-liberal bullshit from a Hillary Clinton presidency but I did not expect it from Obama.
Was I naive? Sure, but what were my options? Was I wrong for actually believing what a candidate said?
I am done with political parties. I changed my voting registration back in November to independent. As for 'left/progressive' politics - it would be better to focus on issues rather than candidates. The idea of a 'better democrat' is just not realistic.
RebelCapitalist.com - Financial Information for the Rest of Us.
I could see Obama would be more "Rubinite" than Hillary in the primary. So, let's say Hillary really was "Rubin light" in comparison to Obama (not to imply at all she was a real reformer here), but my criticism of the "left" is they jump onto candidates and even agendas without doing due diligence.
Even on policy, there isn't a lot of research to find out the real ramifications.
So, during the election the criticism is not only did the left do into denial on Obama's real positions, backers and votes (and policy) but there were many posts which were flat out lies and denials. Case in point is NAFTA, it was very clear from the people to the votes to the position white papers to the advisers Obama would push more bad trade agreements and not renegotiate NAFTA at all.
We had various people claim the opposite, that he would and Hillary wouldn't. Well, the fact was Hillary had more evidence she would than Obama...
so the criticism is people have to stick to policy, to legislation to the details and call it as it is and not rush onto campaign bandwagons believing a candidate is something they are not.
When they do that, they lose power to get policy changed.
The entire blogosphere, instead of going gaga for Obama, could have held out for demands on very specific policy changes and not endorsed anyone.
Same with other candidates. If you want real change, you must demand real change and on top of things one must understand what the real consequences, implications are per policy.
In term of the political front, this was a huge motivator to start EP. Not only was the idea to get more people doing citizen investigation, awareness, details, focused on economics, increase public awareness, participation ...
but to also stop the partisan endorsements, when a particular candidate really is caca, i.e. "all of the above" are caca.
Not to just jump on some bill "title", but to read the bill, understand the real economic ramifications and consequences.
We have all of these blogs, social networking, citizen communication, citizen expose, research and instead of doing proper due diligence on the details with all of these tools..
they were simply incorporated into a massive public relations/marketing agenda. That's not real change.
I mean the fight was to gain control of government and this was achieved...that was a huge rationalization. So, what does one have now? More corporate/lobbyist written legislation, same as when GOP was in control over government....and the real things that must be structurally changed are not happening.
If people were aware during the primaries there could have been much higher demands...
instead I see this as the entire left was hoodwinked with a lot of very nice sounding rhetoric.
I understand that campaigning and governing are two very different things but man come on. He was elected with a mandate for change. And what does he do right away - appoints Larry Summers - this was very disturbing to me knowing Summers background/history. Then quickly came Geithner and that was when I lost faith. I knew we were going to get the same old Clinton/DLC/Hamilton Project/neo-liberal bullshit.
Oh, sure, Obama will try to throw a few bones to people who got him elected but as long the financial oligarchy is protected at the end of the day that is what matters. There is huge difference between making campaign promises and not fulfilling them and just plain outright lying.
RebelCapitalist.com - Financial Information for the Rest of Us.
Pages