Wall Street adviser: Actual unemployment is 37.2%, 'misery index' worst in 40 years

"Please put your seats and tray tables in an upright position......."

How far will this flight take us? ........ All the way to the scene of the crash!

http://washingtonexaminer.com/wall-street-advisor-actual-unemployment-is-37.2-misery-index-worst-in-40-years/article/2542604

I heard him say recently that he had added something like five million jobs! He was quite proud of that number.

He wouldn't lie would he?

The gov't, nor the banks, create jobs! That is a myth!

It does create depts that need to be filled with workers, but that just increases gov't, the "jobs" are just a necessary side effect.

Policy affects the job market, yes, but gov't is not known for creating anything but restriction and regulation, empowering the rich of corporate America. The corporations and their lobbyists with their millions in campaign contributions (bribes) control the restrictions and write the regulations.

This is NOT the Free Market that made America great and prosperous, it is corporatism (fascism), and manipulation of the market..... nothing free about it!

Citizens create the market, the flow of capital into the market, and are the force that creates the offerings of the market.

Like anything govt seeks to take control over, it is doomed for destruction!

Right, and those workers earn no money, nor spend such money, nor affect economic systems, so those cities that happen to situate around military bases in, say, Texas are mere illusions and not really cities. Businesses therein are lies and remain open solely by virtue of bribes and government grants. Of course, if those government departments are closed, the local economy is equally unaffected.

For crying out loud, SS, who do you think you're kidding when you type such BS?

The government creates jobs in as much as they identify a function and try to get it done. If they hire a clerk to file a form, then that creates a job, just as surely as you would create a job if you hired a person to get something done.

If your point is that the government doesn't hire people just to increase employment statistics, then I could agree with you, in that that's certainly not the government's purpose or even practice, but in fact, Congress has a long record of spending money to do things that apparently have no further purpose than to create jobs. (see their recent decisions to buy more tanks and planes that the Army and Air Force didn't want) Congress is certainly part of government and therefore, do create jobs. They probably shouldn't to such an extent, but they do.

Lastly, the government has many achievements beyond restriction and regulation. Our government builds roads and highways. The postal service, and our national defense. The Internet, which you and I use to have this disagreement was made possible only by government involvement. Before these, the free market was generally happy with the status quo. Without our government, we would simply be oppressed by the nearest oligarch.

Right, and those workers earn no money, nor spend such money, nor affect economic systems, so those cities that happen to situate around military bases in, say, Texas are mere illusions and not really cities. Businesses therein are lies and remain open solely by virtue of bribes and government grants. Of course, if those government departments are closed, the local economy is equally unaffected.

For crying out loud, SS, who do you think you're kidding when you type such BS?

The government creates jobs in as much as they identify a function and try to get it done. If they hire a clerk to file a form, then that creates a job, just as surely as you would create a job if you hired a person to get something done.

If your point is that the government doesn't hire people just to increase employment statistics, then I could agree with you, in that that's certainly not the government's purpose or even practice, but in fact, Congress has a long record of spending money to do things that apparently have no further purpose than to create jobs. (see their recent decisions to buy more tanks and planes that the Army and Air Force didn't want) Congress is certainly part of government and therefore, do create jobs. They probably shouldn't to such an extent, but they do.

Lastly, the government has many achievements beyond restriction and regulation. Our government builds roads and highways. The postal service, and our national defense. The Internet, which you and I use to have this disagreement was made possible only by government involvement. Before these, the free market was generally happy with the status quo. Without our government, we would simply be oppressed by the nearest oligarch.

Right, and those workers earn no money, nor spend such money, nor affect economic systems, so those cities that happen to situate around military bases in, say, Texas are mere illusions and not really cities. Businesses therein are lies and remain open solely by virtue of bribes and government grants. Of course, if those government departments are closed, the local economy is equally unaffected.

For crying out loud, SS, who do you think you're kidding when you type such BS?

The government creates jobs in as much as they identify a function and try to get it done. If they hire a clerk to file a form, then that creates a job, just as surely as you would create a job if you hired a person to get something done.

If your point is that the government doesn't hire people just to increase employment statistics, then I could agree with you, in that that's certainly not the government's purpose or even practice, but in fact, Congress has a long record of spending money to do things that apparently have no further purpose than to create jobs. (see their recent decisions to buy more tanks and planes that the Army and Air Force didn't want) Congress is certainly part of government and therefore, do create jobs. They probably shouldn't to such an extent, but they do.

Lastly, the government has many achievements beyond restriction and regulation. Our government builds roads and highways. The postal service, and our national defense. The Internet, which you and I use to have this disagreement was made possible only by government involvement. Before these, the free market was generally happy with the status quo. Without our government, we would simply be oppressed by the nearest oligarch.

Right, and those workers earn no money, nor spend such money, nor affect economic systems, so those cities that happen to situate around military bases in, say, Texas are mere illusions and not really cities. Businesses therein are lies and remain open solely by virtue of bribes and government grants. Of course, if those government departments are closed, the local economy is equally unaffected.

For crying out loud, SS, who do you think you're kidding when you type such BS?

The government creates jobs in as much as they identify a function and try to get it done. If they hire a clerk to file a form, then that creates a job, just as surely as you would create a job if you hired a person to get something done.

If your point is that the government doesn't hire people just to increase employment statistics, then I could agree with you, in that that's certainly not the government's purpose or even practice, but in fact, Congress has a long record of spending money to do things that apparently have no further purpose than to create jobs. (see their recent decisions to buy more tanks and planes that the Army and Air Force didn't want) Congress is certainly part of government and therefore, do create jobs. They probably shouldn't to such an extent, but they do.

Lastly, the government has many achievements beyond restriction and regulation. Our government builds roads and highways. The postal service, and our national defense. The Internet, which you and I use to have this disagreement was made possible only by government involvement. Before these, the free market was generally happy with the status quo. Without our government, we would simply be oppressed by the nearest oligarch.

the unemployment is bipartisan and goes back decades to the first free trade agreement. If one wishes to lay blame lay it in the corporate interests that built up China. They took their jobs and fled to a country with no environmental or labor laws. Then sold the crap back to us.

They built china up and now we have to face them in a new cold war further draining our society of tax dollars. Its a global scam and we are the new peasants.

Right, and those workers earn no money, nor spend such money, nor affect economic systems, so those cities that happen to situate around military bases in, say, Texas are mere illusions and not really cities. Businesses therein are lies and remain open solely by virtue of bribes and government grants. Of course, if those government departments are closed, the local economy is equally unaffected.

Think what he was trying to say this the economy is truly boosted if the job created creates capital as well. This is primarily a public market deal. Unless uncle sam hires a bunch of people to produce vehicles or houses, etc., pays those employees fair wages, and sells those products for fair prices...

Any job that doesn't, only redistributes wealth, instead of building or adding to the economy.

Oh the photo dump argument. you win

I know its easy to go through life without putting to put much critical thought into the current state of affairs.

who in the hell do you think owns the government? Its not you or I that's a given.

The financial Elite pull all strings and get things done their way the elected people be democrat or republican answer to the money.

Think what he was trying to say this the economy is truly boosted if the job created creates capital as well. This is primarily a public market deal. Unless uncle sam hires a bunch of people to produce vehicles or houses, etc., pays those employees fair wages, and sells those products for fair prices...