Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity
Posted at 11:55 AM ET, 03/ 6/2011

Can't we do better than the Obama economy?

By Jennifer Rubin

In January 2009 our unemployment rate was 7.6 percent, and 11.6 million Americans were unemployed. In February 2011 the rate is 8.9 percent, and 13.7 million Americans are out of work. In that same time frame African American unemployment has gone from 12.6 percent to 15.3 percent, while Hispanic unemployment has gone from 9.7% to 11.6%.

The stimulus plan was supposed to keep unemployment from exceeding 8 percent. It didn't do that, and in fact the figures are worse than they seem because of the dramatic drop in labor participation. The Wall Street Journal reports:

Broad-based private-sector gains in manufacturing and service industries more than offset accelerating layoffs by state and local governments, while stable wages suggested subdued inflation pressures.

At the same time, though, one key gauge of the labor market's health -- the labor force participation rate, which measures the percentage of adults who have jobs or are seeking them -- remained stuck at its lowest point since the mid-1980s.

A low participation rate both saps the economy's long-term growth potential and can obscure deeper problems in the labor market. If, for example, labor force participation today were at the same level as before the recession, the jobless rate would have been 11.5 percent in February. . . . As of February, the number of workers on U.S. payrolls was 7.5 million below the December 2007 level.

For all that spending over the past couple of years (which Keynesians told us would "create jobs"), unemployment has worsened, and our job growth is so anemic it will take years to get back to pre-recession levels of employment. And whether you think government should be doing a lot or a little, more and more of our tax revenue will go toward payment of the debt, crowding out funds that might go toward national defense, infrastructure building, border security and the host of domestic programs that liberals fancy. Anyone who thinks this is a formula for a dynamic, affluent society should think again.

We can always imagine that things could be worse. That's the White House line about the stimulus plan. But the question, as it will be in the 2012 election, is: Can't we do better than this? If the answer (or the hope) is that we can, then we'd better come up with pro-growth, pro-jobs policies that will produce different results than Obamanomics.

By Jennifer Rubin  | March 6, 2011; 11:55 AM ET
Categories:  economy  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Q and A with Andy Ferguson about his bestseller Crazy U
Next: Morning Bits


I just caught this woman on Reliable Sources and I just shake my head. You folks in DC just don't get it. What's up with the hate on against Glenn Beck, Coulter and Mark Levin? You Establishment folks don't speak for us. You are in your own little out of touch bubbles. First, you tried to pretend they didn't exist but when their ratings and book sales went through the roof, you couldn't ignore them anymore. Your attacks are nothing short of petty envy and jealousy. You elitists are boring and we ARE going to take over the Party.

Posted by: gregmerle2012 | March 6, 2011 12:19 PM | Report abuse

It's not just Obama, but the Dems in general. Just watched Dick Durbin dance his way around Chris Wallace's straightforward question ("Is $10.5 billion in actual cuts the best that the Democrats can do?"). He was given several opportunities to answer it, but he kept coming back to non-answers such as "The Republicans want to cut from education - education!! - and investments in infrastructure, blah, blah, blah." I wish Chris would've asked him if he ever watched the movie "Waiting for Superman," or if he heard about the GAO report that came out last week citing mind-blowing federal duplication of agencies and programs amounting to hundreds of billions of dollars in savings.

Imagine that you had a good-hearted uncle who was spending ($90K) much more than he earned ($51K) each year, because he was putting the difference ($39K) on his credit card (which already had a balance of $337K). "How are you spending so much more than you earn?", you ask him, and you find out that he can't say no to anyone. Every charity has him on speed-dial. He buys groceries and drops them off at the food bank. He pulls over and gives cash to every homeless person carrying a sign. If a natural disaster hits anywhere in the world, he's writing out a check. He buys cases of Girl Scout cookies and gives them away. He buys expensive solar panels for his house because it is "green" energy, even though it will take 30 years to financially break even. Like a hoarder who can't fathom parting with a jar of old bottle caps, your uncle feels that he has to give just about everything to just about everyone.

I'm talking about OUR uncle, Uncle Sam. The numbers I used are representative of the 2011 budget and the federal debt. Dick Durbin and the Dems can't do better than $10.5 billion in cuts? Even if we cut the Republican's $61 billion out of the budget, that would be like asking the above uncle to cut back $113 a month out of his $7,545 a month spending spree. It's unsustainable. It's irrational. It has to stop.

Posted by: coffeetime | March 6, 2011 1:09 PM | Report abuse

Jen, there is no doubt we can "... do better than this? If the answer (or the hope) is that we can, then we'd better come up with pro-growth, pro-jobs policies that will produce different results than Obamanomics...."

There have to be big changes in five areas (or maybe 6, as I know what RCaruth will say): tax policy, policy regarding "entitlements", energy policy, legal policies, and health care (and ok, monetary policy?). We've so encumbered the productive segments of this nation that it is hard to operate here, and starting up a new plant (nuclear reactor, anyone?) is almost beyond the realm of imagination.

The current Democrats can never do these things - they are simply at the core of the problems. The Republicans might (and in a couple areas do) address the issues. But only after 2012 is there hope they can progress much, if they ever do. Until then at least we're in trench warfare reminiscent of WWI, with no hope of anything good happening.

Posted by: jafco | March 6, 2011 1:28 PM | Report abuse

In 2008, the total US spending was $2.98 trillion. The Obama budget for 2011 are projected t be $3.82 trillion. In other words, the Obama administration has raised federal spending by $840 billion or 28% in three years, but Durban and his gang will tell you that trying to cut $10.5 billion of that extra $840 billion is too much.

Obama and his co conspirators, such as Reid, Pelosi, and Durban are trying to create a new level of Federal spending that is 30% higher than previously allocated and they are jealously protecting that spending.

Forget the establishment survey that showed 192k new jobs. It relies heavily on the highly suspect birth/death model. The household survey showed only 60K new jobs. The participation rate continues to decline and that is where the small drop in unemployment percent comes from. We need a serous rise in the participation rate or tax revenue will remain low making our deficits catastrophically high.

Posted by: RickCaird | March 6, 2011 1:43 PM | Report abuse

Can't we do better than the Obama economy?

The economy is structured for Obama's cronies. So they are doing much much better.

Posted by: gopthestupidparty | March 6, 2011 2:07 PM | Report abuse

Paul Johnon is someone many traditional Conservatives admire,(I don't know if he is as popular with the Neo-Cons.)
"Of course I worry about America," he says. "The whole world depends on America ultimately, particularly Britain. And also, I love America—a marvelous country. But in a sense I don't worry about America because I think America has such huge strengths—particularly its freedom of thought and expression—that it's going to survive as a top nation for the foreseeable future. And therefore take care of the world."

There is no animus towards Obama in the article,in fact no mention at all;Johnson likely feels Obama is irrelevant to America's future. However,although Obama is an aspect of America's freedom of thought and expression,he just isn't worth a bother,therfore I wonder why Jenny is so worried. I think her deeper worry is that even if the entire Government were Veto-Proof Conservatives,things wouldn't be very much different than they are right now,because both parties are clueless on how to restart the great jobs engine,and retain,the "Free Market" trade imbalance*,(Cars&Oil),&the unlimited right to outsourceJobs&Capital. The other mystery is how do we prevent the Fed from monetizing the Debt/further ruining the economically productive class.
With Exports/LOL

Posted by: rcaruth | March 6, 2011 2:18 PM | Report abuse

We probably can't do better than this, because it's not the Obama economy, it's the American economy, and we have a hokey civic religion that gets us to believe in fantasies and idealism.

Compare us to Germany. Germany has great universities and for those who don't go to university, there are apprenticeship programs for just about every profession. Here, you either go to university and finish with a useful degree, or you're expected to be a waitress for seven bucks an hour.

We wallow in some 'free trade' fantasy that the government shouldn't manage trade. Germany encourages exports and discourages imports, primarily by having a VAT which amounts to a 15% import duty and 15% export subsidy for their own goods.

We think government shouldn't pick winners and losers. They have direct government investment in industries they've chosen to be winners, like manufacturing companies, automakers and giant pharmaceutical companies.

I could go on and on. Our manufacturing base has been hollowed out, real median incomes haven't risen in 30 years, we all expect the future to be worse than the past, and we've got near ten percent unemployment (Germany has half the unemployment rate we do).

It's not Obama. It's the consensus that we need to follow some Ayn Randian fantasy of individualism that is driving a dagger through our economic heart. It is why we will fail.

Posted by: member8 | March 6, 2011 3:27 PM | Report abuse

rcaruth writes about "the unlimited right to outsourceJobs&Capital." A personal anecdote: I have a brother who never misses a chance to share his strong opinion on the evils of outsourcing. Yet his actions don't follow his philosophy. His garage and driveway are full of Japanese and European motorcycles and cars, and he and his wife just returned from Yuma where they make a quick jaunt over into Mexico for dental work because they could have 8 crowns done between them for a thousand bucks total.

My guess, rcaruth, is that if one were to scour your purchases and investments, that we might find a similar story, and not just to pick on you, but on virtually everyone else who takes a strong stance against outsourcing. They hate it because it sends "our" jobs elsewhere, but they secretly like it because it results in more-affordable goods and services.

Posted by: coffeetime | March 6, 2011 3:37 PM | Report abuse

My guess, rcaruth, is that if one were to scour your purchases and investments

The question is how do we square restarting the jobs machine with my/our love of things produced by cheap/slave labor elsewehere. Don't bother,you can't. American labor cannot compete with outsourced 3rd world labor. And that's why I LOLed on the idea we can do it with exports.
Despite my love of goods produced by child slave labor,I would support Draconian restrictions on the "right" to outsource jobs and capital,and Draconian limits to how much cheap crap we can import including oil and cars.

Posted by: rcaruth | March 6, 2011 3:53 PM | Report abuse

"Despite my love of goods produced by child slave labor,I would support Draconian restrictions on the 'right' to outsource jobs and capital,and Draconian limits to how much cheap crap we can import including oil and cars."

And that would help things exactly how? The United States doesn't exist on this planet in one universe with every other country being in a parallel universe. We impose "draconian" restrictions and everyone just abides in lockstep to higher prices? I'll suggest what would happen. Never underestimate the ability of motivated people - individual and organized - to circumvent "draconian" measures that they feel work against them. Kind of like when drug prices were so high in the U S relative to other countries that Canada started selling their quotas of drugs to U S citizens at a discount. Kind of like folks who live in the southern portion of my state (WA) who just drive over a bridge to Oregon to buy goods because they charge no sales tax. Kind of like my brother and his wife getting dental work done in Mexico for a fraction of would it would cost here. Kind of like when O.J. Simpson bought a fancy house in Florida so that the homestead exemption could shield it from a legal judgement.

I'd bet my bottom dollar that whatever "bulletproof" rules and regulations you could come up with to enforce your vision of social justice - however admirable that view might be - would be "hacked" not within days but within hours.

Posted by: coffeetime | March 6, 2011 4:41 PM | Report abuse

Compare us to Germany....

Yup - with how our betters have decided to run things, we've finally caught up to them in unemployment. Or do we just consider vast swaths of America dead and let the wolves take over?

It has never really done us any favors to follow Olde Europe.

Posted by: gopthestupidparty | March 6, 2011 4:44 PM | Report abuse

Outsourcing is not our primary problem, increased costs of doing bidness are. The US is still the world’s manufacturing leader; employment in this industry has declined not only because of foreign competition, but also because of dramatic productivity improvements in US plants. What ails us is bad policies and poorly formed laws.

Our energy policy -- stopping coal, the ethanol madness, regulatory prohibitions on offshore and inland petroleum and natural gas -- is raising the cost of food, transportation, fertilizers, plastics, and products of all sorts. In the place of proven energy sources, the government is stimulating the construction of speculative and expensive solar and wind power despite the fact that we don’t know what the lifecycle costs of these fragile and unreliable generating stations are.

Our farm policy is equally idiotic.

One may argue that portions of Sarbanes-Oxley were necessary, but it certainly threw in new hurdles to corporate operations and had the unintended and punitive consequence of weakening the US financial markets by moving a lot of that business overseas. Fewer companies go public with the NYSE, favoring overseas exchanges for that. The 2010 Dodd-sponsored financial reform bill is already turning out to be a horror, it will move more financial activities out of the US, and it’s run by the Fed, not the executive branch, so there’s no political accountability whatsoever. Moreover one of its provisions exempts the SEC from public disclosure letting those porn-watchers off the hook for any idiotic regulations they dream up. In a nutshell, the US is losing its ability to raise and direct capital. How do you think that will help entrepreneurs?

We do not have to have these sorts of obstacles in the way of economic development, but will for at least the next two years.

Posted by: SCMike1 | March 6, 2011 4:52 PM | Report abuse

Posted by: coffeetime

The Fiat,floating currency,free trade era has had 40 years to produce results. The politicians haven't asked themselves yet,if this is what we should keep on doing,and yet somehow expect things to change.

Posted by: rcaruth | March 6, 2011 4:54 PM | Report abuse

free trade era has had 40 years to produce results

And the world isn't as poverty-stricken as it was, thanks to that free trade.

Socialism kills-free markets feed.

Posted by: gopthestupidparty | March 6, 2011 5:07 PM | Report abuse

No. We're lucky its as strong as it is and the revival in jobs in principally a consequence of the R victories and the inherent limitation on the ability of Barry and Co to eviscerate the economy.

Saw you on CNN today.

Posted by: cavalier4 | March 6, 2011 5:43 PM | Report abuse

"And the world isn't as poverty-stricken as it was, thanks to that free trade.

Socialism kills-free markets feed."

Amen. My childhood was spent in the late 50s and 60s (graduating from H.S. in 1972). Even many of today's "poor" enjoy riches beyond the wildest dreams of anything I could've envisioned growing up.

Posted by: coffeetime | March 6, 2011 6:18 PM | Report abuse

Unemployment rate in Germany: 6.9%
Unemployment rate in USA: 9.2%

Posted by: member8 | March 6, 2011 6:23 PM | Report abuse

Unemployment rate in Germany: 6.9%
Unemployment rate in USA: 9.2%

Posted by: member8
We did a trillion dollar stimulus; Germany was fiscally conservative. We're printing money like Zimbabwe; the EU is not. The world is a laboratory. Neo-Keynesian economics has worked about as well in the US as sensible people expected.

Posted by: eoniii | March 6, 2011 7:46 PM | Report abuse

eoniii - Germany did a huge stimulus. It's called unemployment benefits that pay 85% of a workers former salary for two years. They also have a welfare system far larger than ours. They have automatic stabilization built in to their system because they are far more rational than we.

Honestly, I've been there a few times. You turn on the news and instead of rabid partisans foaming at the mouth and ripping each others lungs out, they're rational and reasonable and talk about issues intelligently. I'd never seen anything like it.

Posted by: member8 | March 6, 2011 8:54 PM | Report abuse

eoniii, I compliment you on your mental gymnastics. It takes real effort to convince yourself that unemployment is caused by government spending.

Now if you'll excuse me, I must seal myself in my 'bond vigilante' safe room.

Posted by: member8 | March 6, 2011 8:57 PM | Report abuse

Posted by: member8 (4) Ignore

Unemployment rate in Germany: 6.9%
Unemployment rate in USA: 9.2%

Nope. German u/e rate is 7.3% ours is 8.9%

Fun fact: German unemployment has averaged 9.7% since 1991 with a high of 12.1% and a low of 7.3%, which is as far back as I can get data on Bloomberg.

For the US, over the comparable period, the average has been 5.8% with a high of 10% and a low of 3.9%

US unemployment only surpassed German unemployment in Feb of 09. The only times we have exceeded Germany's BEST unemployment rate was during the 91-92 recession and the current one.

I mean you may love the European welfare state, but at least have some basic grasp of the facts.... sheesh...

5.8% vs 9.7%. Turn off MSNBC for once...

Posted by: sold2u | March 6, 2011 9:23 PM | Report abuse

Germany had an impoverished 3rd world country dumped in its lap in 1989, and the economic drain on it in rebuilding that country, the former East Germany, set its fortunes back. It has now recovered.

I have no idea where you're getting your numbers. But even if you're right, their unemployment is still lower than our reported rate. And if you're honest, you know that our unemployment rate is a huge deliberate undercount - if you aren't getting unemployment benefits and in the work force looking for a job, you don't get counted. Our real unemployment rate is probably closer to 18% if you actually counted it honestly. I trust the German government to count honestly because it's made up of rational people.

Bottom line; chaos doesn't work for an army batallion, a football team, or a nation trying to beat its economic competitors. Germany and China understand this, we are indulging Ayn Randian magical thinking.

Berliner Zeitung: "Europe doesn't need more Germany -- rather it needs more cooperation and community. No matter how proud the German government may be about the recovery of the domestic economy, its deficiencies are obvious. The German model, which relies on a permanent trade surplus, is neither sustainable nor transferable. It works as a model for a selfish nation that floods the neighborhood with its goods and services and exports unemployment at the expense of others. But an approach that can work for an individual country will lead to disaster when everyone copies it."

Whether permanent trade surplus (in high quality manufactures no less) is sustainable or not remains to be seen, but I'd sure like to be swimming in high wage jobs, with the phone ringing off the hook with people trying to hire me.

Posted by: member8 | March 6, 2011 9:41 PM | Report abuse

have no idea where you're getting your numbers. Bloomberg, but dead tree biz sections in the 90s were also helpful.

But even if you're right, their unemployment is still lower than our reported rate.

Now - which is the point.

eoniii - Germany did a huge stimulus. It's called unemployment benefits that pay 85% of a workers former salary for two years.

2 years? 24 months? How cruel. Unfeeling. Pubbies suggest that and Katie bar the door, the world is coming to an end.

Aren't we up to 99 months now?

I trust the German government to count honestly because it's made up of rational people.

They do excel in counting/record keeping.

Those high-paying Green Jobs R just around the corner.

Posted by: gopthestupidparty | March 6, 2011 10:08 PM | Report abuse

Very well put member8,

Your point about unemployment being significantly low balled is crucial, because unlike the US, Germany has the works's most efficient and sophisticates manufacturing base in the world. Unlike the US, the Germans actually produce things and will be able to trade their way out of their difficulties. All the US can do is print it's way out of it and hope that oil continues to be traded in US dollars.

Of course, those days are numbered. There world is abandoning the US dollar.

Posted by: Shingo1 | March 6, 2011 10:15 PM | Report abuse

Yes we can DEFINITELY do better than this; but not with Obama and his traitorous Environmentalists deliberately doing everything they can to strangle this nation to prostration, if not actual death, which may as well be their true object. If they do not let go of their [anti]-energy policies pretty darn soon, rest of us are going to have to throw them out of office, bodily if necessary. And if they do not go quietly, we may wind up hunting them down and strangling them in return.

For more than a generation the liberals’ anti-energy policies have been killing out balance of payments; making us indebted to people who are alien to this nation and hostile to its values (even the values of their Environmentalist enablers); they have been weakening our self -defense (as if they care); they are destroying jobs by the hundreds of thousands; they are frustrating the creation of new jobs and perpetuating our continuing economic crisis. And let’s be clear about this: THEY, INCLUDING OBAMA, DO NOT CARE.

“But, but, but we need clean affordable renewable energy,” they whine. Fine, let them achieve that with they own money; but they must stop ruining the country simply because they have issues.

The idiotic super bloated blubber blabber mouth Michael Moore is the perfect caricature of the freaks that need to be eliminated, or at least relegated to say an Indian reservation and ignored from now on.

Posted by: nvjma | March 6, 2011 11:09 PM | Report abuse

member8, our deficit in 2010 was 11.4% of GDP. Germany's deficit in 2010 was 3.5% of GDP. Merkel turned down Obama's request that Germany enact a reckless stimulus program like ours. Similarly, Jean Claude Trichet, Europe's central banker, has refused to follow Fed chief Bernanke's reckless "quantitative easings". Surprise, surprise -- Germany's economy is recovering much quicker than ours, and the Euro is stronger than the dollar.

No nation in history every prospered by spending beyond its means and debasing its currency. We won't be the first.

Posted by: eoniii | March 7, 2011 12:55 AM | Report abuse

Hey it would seem that if they want a communist regime in power, they (the extreme left of the Dems) are about to get a chance. Remember if you want a revolution you need the people to see no chance at real change. You need the people to believe the opposition is determined to destroy your future when in fact no such thing is true. But you need to keep lying and any time someone calls you on that lie you go after them personally, insulting, demeaning and degrading until they back down. That communist ideal worked so well in Cuba, The Soviet Union, and elsewhere. We need it here, but darn those stupid average Americans (pick an insult Teabagger, Racist, Homophobe, Sexist, Oligarch) just dont realize how bad we need "Distrubution of Wealth" ie: take what you did not earn from someone who did.

Wake up our country is falling apart around us and it is no accident, it is being done by well meaning and many not so well meaning people we have elected in good faith that they meant what they said. Even when overwhelming evidence was presented by the opposition that they were lying. (Neither party is innocent).

Start buying silver and gold and trading dollars for Yuan, and Yen. And pray you don't have to shoot to many looters.

That or our government can wake up and cut back spending drastically.

I would prefer less services and less duplication, and a balanced budget amendment to ensure our country stays within its means. To the doom and gloom scenario Soros seems to see comming. He is shuffling assets offshore so quick you can hear the the sonic boom.

Posted by: opspwcjc | March 7, 2011 2:13 AM | Report abuse

Interesting! I just now printed Coupons of my Favorite Brands for free, search for "Printapons" I highly recommend them

Posted by: joanjries | March 7, 2011 5:48 AM | Report abuse

Obama was only one of the Leftist Congressional conspirators that destroyed Bush-era prosperity-- those halcion pre-Pelosi years of unemployment <5%!

VIDEO EVIDENCE: Animated Map of Unemployment Since 2007

The Pelosi-Obama-Reid (POR) economy kicked in during the latter part of 2007, when its architects decided that starving the economy of energy by refusing to allow more offshore drilling in the face of $4 gas prices was a winning political position. Pelosi claimed that because we couldn't totally "drill our way out of this," we shouldn't increase drilling at all. Reid put an exclamation point on Pelosi's stubbornness by insisting that fossil fuels are "making us sick."

What Pelosi, Obama, and Reid should do now is expand tax cuts, ditch all of the alleged "investments" in so-called "green" (read: globaloney) technology, open up oil and gas exploration, watch the royalty money pour in and employ hard-working Americans in good paying jobs again.

I know: that's way too much to "hope" that Americans be permitted to use our own resources to lower unemployment and enrich our country.

Posted by: KaddafiDelendaEst | March 7, 2011 7:33 AM | Report abuse

"The Obama economy" ?? Are you kidding? I wish Republicans would stop lying about whose "economy" we're in. It's the short memory of Americans again.

Posted by: smartcritic1 | March 7, 2011 7:49 AM | Report abuse

Yup, it's short memory time again.

For some reason this column avoids mentioning the Bush administration as the source of any of the downturn in the economy.

Could it be that this column is really nothing more than sophisticated name calling: "Obama and his policies are bad."
You know, just more red meat for the troops.

Until and unless the right recognizes that their actions and policies contributed to the crash, then their criticisms and commentary of Obama's policies are meaningless for building productive policies for going forward.

Don't you know, red meat is bad for your health.

Posted by: loumilp | March 7, 2011 8:58 AM | Report abuse

eoniii, yes Germany didn't want to do a stimulus bill, but as I pointed out to you they have automatic stimulus built in to their very system. You can't just fire people there, they have to have done something wrong. So you don't just get mass unemployment the way you do here. That means industry, some of it partially state-owned, takes some of the pain and its not all dumped on workers.

Also they get 2 years of unemployment at 85% former salary (far more generous than our system) and they don't have to be looking for work either, they can go to college or start their own businesses or whatever and still get paid.

Also they have cradle to grave government health care, so when you lose your job you don't also lose your health care.

American workers are totally without a net, so when unemployment comes along, social stability is imperiled. You lose everything, you get an unemployment check which is a pittance, lose your health care, etc. We are closer to China in that respect.

eoniii, the simple fact of the matter is Germany is kicking our butts on a lot of fronts. Go to the nicest part of whatever town you live in and look at what they are driving. There's your answer.

German people also feel like they are a part of something larger than themselves and their own interests. We have created the 'youre on your own' society, which if you don't happen to be born well can be pretty terrifying.

Posted by: member8 | March 7, 2011 9:41 AM | Report abuse

How convenient that Rubin uses January 2009 as her starting point -- the month Bush left office but right in the middle of when the economy, and the employment rate, were suffering massive blows thanks to his disastrous administration.

Posted by: Observer691 | March 7, 2011 10:29 AM | Report abuse

You can't just fire people there, they have to have done something wrong

Or not hire them in the 1st place, the larger unemployment for years than we had.

So you don't just get mass unemployment the way you do here.

U also don't break the expectation of ave. 6% unemployment standard that was the norm for years, either.

When you're under 5%, there will be larger layoffs..........

And Germany came out of the Depression fast than we did, too.....Maybe because the let the market work while we chained it down?

American workers are totally without a net, so when unemployment comes along, social stability is imperiled. You lose everything, you get an unemployment check which is a pittance, lose your health care, etc. We are closer to China in that respect.

Huh? Totally w/o a net? There's no food stamps, no medicaid, no SSI, etc.

health care, = U don't lose your health care, U lose your health insurance. Not the same thing - and U never take into account that one might not need health insurance in the short term, until one finds a job. U assume death's door until they find a job. Just becuause 1 has health insurance doesn't mean 1 gets the care they need - see the Anglosphere countries.

And we will never know what kind of health care system any of them might have had if we hadn't subsidized their military for over 50 years.

And since there's no social net, exactly what has been taken out of my paycheck for decades? Where did it go?

Posted by: gopthestupidparty | March 7, 2011 10:29 AM | Report abuse

anyone notice the parallels between Charlie Sheen and the GOP, LOL, I'm winning!!!!! I think all America is now happy the GOP has taken control of the house and focused on jobs, woops, I mean focused on cutting healthcare for the poor, a woman's right to her own body ( a lot like the taliban) cutting education (after all the US ranks 22nd that's plenty high) and generating tax cuts for the wealthy(who keep saying they don't think they should have them, don't need them and it won't add jobs , Buffett, Gates, Gross)

but don't worry the GOP is WINNING, LOL

the GOP might not beat the green party in the next election.

Posted by: ptrppr100 | March 7, 2011 9:52 PM | Report abuse

If you account for the spending on both wars that the Bush Administration failed to budget, what would be the real dollars spent from 2001 to 2008?

Posted by: tlfoster2 | March 8, 2011 4:20 PM | Report abuse

Post a Comment

We encourage users to analyze, comment on and even challenge's articles, blogs, reviews and multimedia features.

User reviews and comments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, we will take steps to block users who violate any of our posting standards, terms of use or privacy policies or any other policies governing this site. Please review the full rules governing commentaries and discussions.

characters remaining

RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2011 The Washington Post Company