Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity
2.7%  Q1 GDP    4.57%  avg. 30-year mortgage     9.5%  Unemployment

Join me at 1 p.m. for a live chat on unemployment

Please join me at 1 p.m. today for a live chat, where I'll take your questions on unemployment.

Click here to see the discussion and to submit a question, which you can do before the chat starts or as it's underway. I'll get to as many as I can.

Our chat coincides with the kickoff of the big jobs summit at the White House, where President Obama is hosting 130 corporate executives and others to try to find a way to eat into the nation's official 10.2 percent unemployment rate.

-- Frank Ahrens
Sign up to get The Ticker on Twitter

By Frank Ahrens  |  December 3, 2009; 12:48 PM ET
Categories:  The Ticker  | Tags: Frank Ahrens, Obama, unemployment  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Bernanke: It's hard to predict and deflate bubbles in real time
Next: Stocks surge on drop in unemployment

Comments

So on your chat, you rant about how the unemployment problem is worse than the actual figures. Yet when someone points out the shallowness of the recovery after the Bush tax cuts, and how the current crisis started under him, you sanctimoniously inform them that the unemployment rate was under 7 percent. Show your biases much, Frank?

Posted by: Elkay1 | December 3, 2009 3:48 PM | Report abuse

Hey, I've got a question: when a commenter pointed out that the US has slower growth than a slew of other countries with significantly higher marginal tax rates on income, Frank asserted that the US has "one of the highest *corporate* tax rates in the world."

When someone clearly more informed than Frank responded that, while it appears that way to the woefully uninformed, the actual corporate tax rate--after you figure in all the loopholes--is actually one of the *lowest* in real terms. (I remember McCain hitting this "highest corporate tax rate" talking point in an effort to gull some of the more rube-y potential voters during the 2008 presidential race)

Anyway, my question revolves around Frank's response, which consisted solely of the phrase "Back Atcha". The question is: Was that merely a panic response? As in, "Oh, Jeez!! I knew I should have let Ezra Klein fill in for me during this chat!! He actually *knows* stuff about stuff!!"

Or was there some sort of deeper post-modernist point you were trying to make?

Just curious...

Posted by: antontuffnell | December 3, 2009 10:05 PM | Report abuse


This is really a great stuff for sharing.keep it up .Thanks for sharing,i would like to share something with all people as well.http://www.shopstyletoday.com

Posted by: nisnsd | December 3, 2009 10:06 PM | Report abuse

This is really a great stuff for sharing.keep it up .Thanks for sharing,i would like to share something with all people as well.http://www.shopstyletoday.com

Posted by: nisnsd | December 3, 2009 10:07 PM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company