America in Permanent Decline

[Big Smoothy]

This started (as we discussed with LAM and others a few decades ago). Now, we are feeling the results. This is permanent. But what's pathetic, is that politics is even mentioned. What's the point?
--
Recession officially over, but US incomes kept falling
Drop appears to be the largest in several decades, Census Bureau data shows

By ERIC DASH
updated 10/10/2011

In a grim sign of the enduring nature of the economic slump, household income declined more in the two years after the recession ended than it did during the recession itself, new research has found.

Between June 2009, when the recession officially ended, and June 2011, inflation-adjusted median household income fell 6.7 percent, to $49,909, according to a study by two former Census Bureau officials. During the recession ??? from December 2007 to June 2009 ??? household income fell 3.2 percent.

The finding helps explain why Americans??? attitudes toward the economy, the country???s direction and its political leaders have continued to sour even as the economy has been growing. Unhappiness and anger have come to dominate the political scene, including the early stages of the 2012 presidential campaign.

President Obama recently called the economic situation ???an emergency,??? and over the weekend he assailed Congressional Republicans for opposing his jobs bill, which includes tax cuts that would raise take-home pay. Republicans blame Mr. Obama for the slump, saying he has issued a blizzard of regulations and promised future tax increases that have hurt business and consumer confidence.

Entire: NYT: Recession officially over, but US incomes kept falling - Business - US business - The New York Times - msnbc.com

 

[Big Pimpin]

Wasn't Obama was elected to fix this?

 

[LAM]

the country is braindead, far to many have been "educated" by the tv and are clueless as to the real causes and contributors of the economic problems in the US.

 

[LAM]

Wasn't Obama was elected to fix this?

how exactly does one fix 30-40 years of bad and lopsided economic policy in only 3 years? and what help has the GOP been beside obstructing at every turn? how many jobs bills came out of the House since the GOP took control? zero....how exactly does contracting fiscal stimulus during a recession recovery help things?

 

[Big Pimpin]

how exactly does one fix 30-40 years of bad and lopsided economic policy in only 3 years? and what help has the GOP been beside obstructing at every turn? how many jobs bills came out of the House since the GOP took control? zero....how exactly does contracting fiscal stimulus during a recession recovery help things?

Hell if I know but he campaigned on it and you lefties voted for him.

 

[Dark Geared God]

its bush's fault

 

[troubador]

its bush's fault

Neo-liberals ate my baby.

 

[TonyMack]

its bush's fault

And Carter, and Bush 1, and Clinton. Oh Clinton fucked us hard!

Want some interesting reading? Glass Steagall Act of 1933, aka second banking act of 1933, which prevented the coupling of investment banking and lending. Clinton repealed via Gramm-Leach-Bliley in 1999. Then the fucker left office leaving the monitoring to Bush and Greenspan. What did they do? They fucking let all the dumbasses turn their houses into atm machines, and wall street said hell yah!, we'll loan you the money; afterall AIG is insuring against default...

How did Carter have a hand in this? Community Investment Act of 1977 laid the ground work for all this to happen... fucking fucktard.

I'm not bitter at all!.. Fucking dumbass mother fuckers!!

 

[robbiek426]

A.) You cannot come out of reccession when you give a large sum of money to the very same lenders who caused this "Bubble" aka hyper inflation to take place.

This is one of the only time I can think of in my life when someone was actually rewarded for doing the wrong damn thing.

End The Fed.

 

[LAM]

And Carter, and Bush 1, and Clinton. Oh Clinton fucked us hard!

Want some interesting reading? Glass Steagall Act of 1933, aka second banking act of 1933, which prevented the coupling of investment banking and lending. Clinton repealed via Gramm-Leach-Bliley in 1999. Then the fucker left office leaving the monitoring to Bush and Greenspan. What did they do? They fucking let all the dumbasses turn their houses into atm machines, and wall street said hell yah!, we'll loan you the money; afterall AIG is insuring against default...

How did Carter have a hand in this? Community Investment Act of 1977 laid the ground work for all this to happen... fucking fucktard.

I'm not bitter at all!.. Fucking dumbass mother fuckers!!

It was 3 texas republicans that tried to get Glass Steagall repealed but they couldn't get the legislation out of committee, so they slipped it in as a rider on the ominbus spending bill, Clinton had to sign the bill or shut down the government. when Bush Sr did that he lost his re-election, Clinton was not going to make the same mistake. but this is how the GOP plays, dirty...

neither Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac or the CRA caused the problems of the banking collapse in 2007 you are dead wrong...

The Community Reinvestment Act of 1977: Not Guilty
Mortgage Data Refute Charge that the CRA is at the Root of the Financial Crisis
http://traigerlaw.com/publications/The_community_reinvestment_act_of_1977-not_guilty_1-26-09.pdf

The Federal Reserve Board
The Subprime Crisis: Is Government Housing Policy to Blame?
Abstract: A growing literature suggests that housing policy, embodied by the Community Reinvestment Act (CRA) and the affordable housing goals of the government sponsored enterprises, may have caused the subprime crisis. The conclusions drawn in this literature, for the most part, have been based on associations between aggregated national trends. In this paper we examine more directly whether these programs were associated with worse outcomes in the mortgage market, including delinquency rates and measures of loan quality. We rely on two empirical approaches. In the first approach, which focuses on the CRA, we conjecture that historical legacies create significant variations in the lenders that serve otherwise comparable neighborhoods. Because not all lenders are subject to the CRA, this creates a quasi-natural experiment of the CRA's effect. We test this conjecture by examining whether neighborhoods that have been disproportionally served by CRA-covered institutions historically experienced worse outcomes. The second approach takes advantage of the fact that both the CRA and GSE goals rely on clearly defined geographic areas to determine which loans are favored by the regulations. Using a regression discontinuity approach, our tests compare the marginal areas just above and below the thresholds that define eligibility, where any effect of the CRA or GSE goals should be clearest. We find little evidence that either the CRA or the GSE goals played a significant role in the subprime crisis. Our lender tests indicate that areas disproportionately served by lenders covered by the CRA experienced lower delinquency rates and less risky lending. Similarly, the threshold tests show no evidence that either program had a significantly negative effect on outcomes.
FRB: FEDS Abstract 2011-36


*The Real Causes of the Banking Collapse*

Causes of the Financial Crisis
http://assets.opencrs.com/rpts/R40173_20100409.pdf

A Fistful of Dollars:
Lobbying and the Financial Crisis???
Deniz Igan, Prachi Mishra, and Thierry Tressel
Research Department, IMF
May 06, 2010
http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/wp/2009/wp09287.pdf


Abstract
Has lobbying by financial institutions contributed to the financial crisis? This paper uses
detailed information on financial institutions??? lobbying and mortgage lending activities to
answer this question. We find that lobbying was associated with more risk-taking during
2000-07 and with worse outcomes in 2008. In particular, lenders lobbying more intensively
on issues related to mortgage lending and securitization (i) originated mortgages with higher
loan-to-income ratios, (ii) securitized a faster growing proportion of their loans, and (iii) had faster growing originations of mortgages. Moreover, delinquency rates in 2008 were higher in areas where lobbying lenders??? mortgage lending grew faster. These lenders also experienced negative abnormal stock returns during the rescue of Bear Stearns and the collapse of Lehman Brothers, but positive abnormal returns when the bailout was announced. Finally, we find a higher bailout probability for lobbying lenders. These findings suggest that lending by politically active lenders played a role in accumulation of risks and thus contributed to the financial crisis.

 

[LAM]

Hell if I know but he campaigned on it and you lefties voted for him.

yes and the GOP has done everything in their power to make sure that he failed...those are some "true" Americans there

 

[DOMS]

yes and the GOP has done everything in their power to make sure that he failed...those are some "true" Americans there

It's never the black man's fault. Got it.

 

[LAM]

It's never the black man's fault. Got it.

name one thing the GOP has done to help bring the country out of recession?

 

[DOMS]

name one thing the GOP has done to help bring the country out of recession?

I'm not talking about what someone else has done. What the hell has Obama done to fix it? More importantly, what has he done to make it worse?

 

[robbiek426]

Neither party has done anything except typical career politicians politicking like a mother fucker.

Both of the parties should be held accountable for their actions or lack of.

Please guys, step away from the party attitude. The media is dividing America with politics so when we do turn on someone its on eachother instead of those who really caused the problem.

 

[SFW]

When ron paul takes office in 2012, hes going to open the Ft. Knox vault. I hope america is ready for the outcome. He is going to destroy America as we know it by revealing some shocking truths.

 

[Dark Geared God]

When ron paul takes office in 2012, hes going to open the Ft. Knox vault. I hope america is ready for the outcome. He is going to destroy America as we know it by revealing some shocking truths.

 

[LAM]

I'm not talking about what someone else has done. What the hell has Obama done to fix it? More importantly, what has he done to make it worse?

ABANDONING WHAT WORKS (AND MOST OTHER THINGS, TOO)
Expansionary fiscal policy is still the best tool for boosting jobs
http://www.epi.org/page/-/old/briefingpapers/BriefingPaper304 (4).pdf

Page. 7

In short, it seems clear that the political will to use expansionary fiscal policy as a tool to stabilize a listing economy has been exhausted. Deficit reduction now dominates the debate. It is crucial to note that there is no economic imperative for such deficit reduction. The costs of government borrowing, for example, remain extraordinarily low today, reflecting the fact that the muchfeared bond markets either choose not to or (more likely) cannot impose any sanctions on the U.S. government for borrowing. And unless interest rates rise rapidly (which they show no sign of doing), the fear that rising budget deficits will ???crowd-out??? private-sector activity rather than
simply add to it has no basis.9

It should also be noted that this near-complete lack of crowding-out is what makes the multiple independent estimates of job loss resulting from proposed spending cuts so close to one another. During normal times, when unemployment is not historically high, the boost to jobs stemming from increased government spending may be offset with some degree of crowding-out of private-sector spending. The net outcome of these two competing influences can be tricky to calculate. But when there is no private-sector crowding-out, calculations of the jobs impact of government spending are quite easy to calculate???and this is why estimates made by different
economists are currently clustering around a tight range of numbers. Despite the clear consensus based on textbook macroeconomics that near-term fiscal contraction will lead to higher unemployment rates, some recently have tried to argue the opposite, positing that a rapid decrease in the budget deficit could actually be good for stabilization. Surprisingly, although in no way supported by the clear economics of the current situation, this idea seems to have somehow won the political day, as at least some members of both parties in Congress have proposed escalating spending cuts undertaken in the name of balancing the budget.

There is, however, no plausible mechanism for a rapid decrease in the deficit in the next few years (particularly decreases spurred by spending cuts) to help stabilize the economy. Past instances of rapid fiscal contraction actually
aiding overall growth have almost without exception been undertaken in very different circumstances than what the U.S. economy faces today. Specifically, these so-called ???expansionary contractions??? have happened when: (a) countries were already growing strongly in the period before the fiscal contraction took effect; (b) interest rates were very high and deficit reductions had room to reduce them; and/or (c) nations matched the fiscal contraction with large exchange-rate depreciations and boosted exports.10 Simply put, none of these apply to or are in the offing for the U.S. economy.

 

[Zaphod]

Neither party has done anything except typical career politicians politicking like a mother fucker.

Both of the parties should be held accountable for their actions or lack of.

Please guys, step away from the party attitude. The media is dividing America with politics so when we do turn on someone its on eachother instead of those who really caused the problem.

I find it hilarious how so many think that the particular party they feel affiliated with is acting in the best interests of the country and the people.

 

[Zaphod]

When ron paul takes office in 2012, hes going to open the Ft. Knox vault. I hope america is ready for the outcome. He is going to destroy America as we know it by revealing some shocking truths.

Okay.

 

[Big Smoothy]

More news. Gets better and better, doesn't it?
--
A Long, Steep Drop for Americans' Standard of Living

Published: Wednesday, 19 Oct 2011 | 2:15 PM ET

By: Ron Scherer

Think life is not as good as it used to be, at least in terms of your wallet? You'd be right about that. The standard of living for Americans has fallen longer and more steeply over the past three years than at any time since the US government began recording it five decades ago.

Bottom line: The average individual now has $1,315 less in disposable income than he or she did three years ago at the onset of the Great Recession – even though the recession ended, technically speaking, in mid-2009. That means less money to spend at the spa or the movies, less for vacations, new carpeting for the house, or dinner at a restaurant.

In short, it means a less vibrant economy, with more Americans spending primarily on necessities. The diminished standard of living, moreover, is squeezing the middle class, whose restlessness and discontent are evident in grass-roots movements such as the tea party and "Occupy Wall Street" and who may take out their frustrations on incumbent politicians in next year's election.

What has led to the most dramatic drop in the US standard of living since at least 1960? One factor is stagnant incomes: Real median income is down 9.8 percent since the start of the recession through this June, according to Sentier Research in Annapolis, Md., citing census bureau data. Another is falling net worth – think about the value of your home and, if you have one, your retirement portfolio. A third is rising consumer prices, with inflation eroding people's buying power by 3.25 percent since mid-2008.

News Headlines

 

[Big Smoothy]

Welcome To The Third World, Part 4: Boomers Reap What They???ve Sown

by John Rubino on December 19, 2011

It was fun while it lasted. We Baby Boomers got to diss our elders when we were young and borrow without restraint through middle-age. Few generations have traveled such a smooth stretch of financial/psychological highway.

But now that we???re???old???the world we created isn???t so congenial. Our savings are inadequate, jobs are scarce, and retirement, as a result, is out of reach for many of us. We are, in short, reaping what we???ve sown these past four decades. From today???s Wall Street Journal:


Oldest Baby Boomers Face Jobs Bust

Many older Americans fear they will be working well into their 60s because they didn???t save enough to retire. Millions more wish they were that lucky: Without full-time jobs, they are short of money and afraid of what lies ahead.

Deborah Kallick was a professor of biomedical chemistry at the University of Minnesota until she ventured into the private sector in 2000 with a job in genome research. She is now one of more than four million Americans aged 55 to 64 who can???t find full-time work. That number has nearly doubled in five years, according to U.S. Department of Labor figures in October.

Ms. Kallick, 60 years old, has been unemployed since 2007 and lives in the Northern California home of an ex-boyfriend. She has run out of unemployment insurance, used up most of her retirement savings and is indebted to relatives and credit-card companies.

A good job could settle her accounts, she said. Until then, Ms. Kallick relies on generosity, occasional consulting work and the sale of sweaters, purses and other possessions on eBay.

???It is very hard to work through this and learn to be calm and happy day to day,??? said Ms. Kallick, who never married. ???It has taken a lot of strength and courage to learn to do that.???

Older Baby Boomers are trying to postpone retirement, as many find their spending habits far outpaced their thrift. With U.S. unemployment at 8.6%, and much higher among people in their teens and 20s, younger members of the labor pool accuse Boomers of refusing to gracefully exit the workplace.

But their long-held grip is slipping, as employers look past older Americans to younger, cheaper workers.
The Labor Department counts people as unemployed only if they have looked for a job in the previous month. By that definition, 6.5% of workers aged 55 to 64 were unemployed in October, below the national average but more than twice the jobless rate for the group five years earlier.

Taking into account the number of older people who want full-time work but are unemployed, working part-time or need a job but have quit looking, the percentage jumps to 17.4%, or 4.3 million Americans ages 55 to 64, according to the government data. The number has grown from 2.4 million in October 2006.

This group without full-time work now accounts for more than one in six older Americans seeking positions.

Entire: Welcome To The Third World, Part 4: Boomers Reap What They

 

[secdrl]

Entire: NYT: Recession officially over, but US incomes kept falling - Business - US business - The New York Times - msnbc.com

NYT. Enough said.

 

[DOMS]

NYT. Enough said.

The NY Times is the anus of liberals. It's full of shit.

 

[BP2000]

Both of the parties should be held accountable for their actions or lack of.

Please guys, step away from the party attitude. The media is dividing America with politics so when we do turn on someone its on eachother instead of those who really caused the problem.

Yea the establishment has both parties on a leash. They are smart. They own all the information outlet's (TV station's). It's the old divide and conquer strategy. Work's quite well. You really think they give a fuck if the president has a blue or red tie on?

The way the system is setup you have to be a cuthroat guy to even get to the top. Once you are there they don't care as long as you are selfish.

The American people have to educate themselves and have some values and teach them to their kids so they will be able to recognize when they are getted fucked over.

But so far they don't care. And as long as we don't care we will get fucked. Period.

"Freedome requires constant vigilance"

 

[Dark Geared God]

The NY Times is the anus of liberals. It's full of shit.

 

[oufinny]

Typical, LAM says the GOP plays dirty when O'Negro stopped the vote on a pipeline that the US desperately needs to lower the trade deficit and give us domestic oil but no, I am going to let some tiny percentage of the democrats stop a vote. Please, nigger-Bama is as bad or worse with his insighting a class warefare riot, even if he has a point.

PS - his jobs bill was a joke. I would have been all for it if it did anything that would help. The liberal agenda is about as effective as Bush's tax cuts were; they both do nothing but add to the deficit and put no more money in anyone's pocket.

 

[LAM]

PS - his jobs bill was a joke. I would have been all for it if it did anything that would help. The liberal agenda is about as effective as Bush's tax cuts were; they both do nothing but add to the deficit and put no more money in anyone's pocket.

building the US infrastructure is what brought the US out of the great depression, what a waste that was...and bringing work to people vs having them having to re-locate, pure stupidity...the GOP doesn't want government to solve any problems which is why the US is falling behind every other country in the OECD as they are.

 

[oufinny]

building the US infrastructure is what brought the US out of the great depression, what a waste that was...

How you paying for it? I agree that needs to be done, we have the worst roads I have ever been on in Houston but that doesn't mean you print more money just to improve them. Make it revenue neutral and make it so it products maximum jobs and people will support it. This is where you liberals don't get it, your idea is to put all the cost on the rich, which I agree they need to pay, but you throw in some retarded extras that drive up the cost so no one will vote for it. This, in a nutshell, what O'Bama's jobs bill.

 

[LAM]

How you paying for it? I agree that needs to be done, we have the worst roads I have ever been on in Houston but that doesn't mean you print more money just to improve them. Make it revenue neutral and make it so it products maximum jobs and people will support it. This is where you liberals don't get it, your idea is to put all the cost on the rich, which I agree they need to pay, but you throw in some retarded extras that drive up the cost so no one will vote for it. This, in a nutshell, what O'Bama's jobs bill.

the fed gov has no say in how much money the FRB prints, remember the executive branch has ZERO power over the FRB they are a private entity. the FRB prints money ONLY for banks and wallstreet it goes nowhere else.

you can easily fund capital projects with tax revenues and municipal bonds.

after WWII tax revenues were hiked on the top earners to help pay down war debt, a natural process in economics. but the no tax increase pledge by Grover has now impeded some basic economic functions which make solving problems much harder than it should be. the Tax Haven Act can not even make it out of committee which would easily fund all of the capital projects in the US.


Carl Levin - United States Senator for Michigan: Newsroom - Press Releases

www.ctj.org/pdf/stopact.pdf