Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: zax who wrote (929460)	4/7/2016 3:43:06 PM
From: jlallen	2 Recommendations Recommended By FJB locogringo Respond to of 1573690

LOL!! You have been grubered again, sonny!!!

To: zax who wrote (929460)	4/7/2016 4:10:58 PM
From: TideGlider	3 Recommendations Recommended By FJB locogringo TopCat Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 1573690

laughable. Why is Janet Yellen worried about the economy being "too weak"?

To: zax who wrote (929460)	4/7/2016 4:44:33 PM
From: tntpal	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1573690

Oh Yea - McDonald's must have hired a whole lot of part time workers since Obama took office! --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Did President Obama really create 14 million jobs? '...He's correct...if you look at the data in the most favorable way possible for him. The United States has only added about 9.3 million jobs during his term -- from the time Obama took office in January 2009 through December 2015. That's the most conventional way to assess a president's economic track record. Viewing it that way means Obama is pretty far behind the job creation of Reagan and Clinton.' ...In his speech, Obama did lament the inequality that persists in the United States. Wages and salaries have barely budged under his watch. The typical family is actually taking home less today than when he took office when you adjust for inflation. http://money.cnn.com/2016/01/13/news/economy/obama-jobs-state-of-the-union/ ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Investors Business Daily’s editors noted last week that 2015 data showed that the Obama recovery was still the worst in the post-war period (via Newsalert): Last week, the Joint Economic Committee of Congress issued a new report on the Obama recovery that’s loaded with even more bleak news. On almost every measure examined, the 2009-15 recovery since the recession ended in June of 2009 has been the meekest in more than 50 years. Start with the broadest measure: growth in output. The chart with this editorial compares the Obama growth pace with that of the average recovery coming out of the last eight recessions, and with the Reagan recovery, and over the same number of months (77). Democrats used to disparage the Reagan expansion as nothing special. Yet the growth rate over the first 25 quarters under Reagan was 34%, vs. 14.3% under Obama. How much does this matter? If we had grown at an average pace, GDP in 2015 would have been about $1.8 trillion higher. Under the Reagan recovery, growth would have been $2.7 trillion higher. … But even on a per capita basis, real GDP has grown only 9% vs. 18.8% for the average recovery. That is the lowest of any post-1960 recovery. The growth decline in this key gauge of living standards is alarming. IBD’s editorial board specifically looked at the jobs data, and found it even worse: Yes, official unemployment of just over 5% today is very low. But that’s because 94 million people in America over the age of 16 aren’t in the labor force. Labor force participation rates have fallen sharply for working age Americans. If job growth had been the same as in the average recovery, we would have 5.9 million more Americans working. Amazingly, if we had had a Reagan-paced job recovery, we would today have at least 12 million more Americans working. That’s more people than in the labor force of Michigan and Indiana combined