Coronavirus / COVID-19
Saturday, October 6, 2012
Not long ago, we used stock market-style technical analysis
to reveal that the policies implemented during President George W.
Bush's tenure in office were most likely responsible for launching the
economic recovery that followed the December 2007 recession and that the
policies implemented during President Barack H. Obama's tenure in
office were most likely responsible for derailing that recovery.
Since technical analysis is such a weak analytical technique, we thought we'd revisit that topic today using a combination of regression analysis and statistical analysis, focusing in on the one data metric that really defines a recession for most people: job layoffs.
Our chart below uses the Bureau of Labor Statistics' data for the seasonally-adjusted number of initial unemployment insurance benefit claims filed each week for the period spanning 6 July 2008 through 26 September 2010, which tracks the number of job layoffs that occurred during this period. We've annotated the chart to show the major events that coincided with major shifts in the trend in job layoffs or that affected the trend in data for short periods of time.
In the chart above, we've also indicated Mark Thoma's "effectiveness lag", which represents the typical amount of time from when federal government policies are implemented to when they have a noticeable impact, which he indicates is 6 to 18 months long. We note that economists have long recognized this real world phenomenon and that its existence is widely accepted (except perhaps by philosophy professors who would seem to care more about credentials than thought.)
Here, the chart shows that the rate of layoffs in the U.S. was increasing at an average rate of 7.599 per week from August 2008 up until they peaked in March 2009. Along the way, we note an unusual outlier where the number of layoffs plunged in late December-early January, which corresponds to the emergency bridge loan that the Bush administration extended to failing companies in the auto industry to avoid massive layoffs during the Christmas and New Year's holidays in the U.S.
Those massive layoffs were only postponed however to the period from mid-January 2009 through February 2009, as the number of weekly layoffs in the U.S. stopped rising and topped out at this time. Without the Bush administration bridge loan to the auto industry, we note that the peak in layoffs during the recession would have occurred earlier.
After topping out, the pace of layoffs began to fall at a rate of 4,109 per week, which held up through mid-November 2009. There is one near-outlier recorded during this period, which coincides with the Obama administration's "Cash for Clunkers" program, which temporarily saw the number of weekly layoffs fall while it ran. And then, because the program could no longer be sustained, the rate of layoffs in the U.S. resumed the path they had previously been on.
All that changed after 29 November 2009 however, which President Obama's signature achievement of his administration, the bill that the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (aka "ObamaCare") was introduced in the House of Representatives as H.R. 3962. The introduction of this bill, the result of the Democratic Party's supermajority in the U.S. Congress which meant it was likely to pass, and the uncertainty it unleashed for employers combined with the higher costs it mandated for them, derailed the economic recovery. We observe that derailment in the sudden deceleration of the pace of recovery as the number of layoffs in the U.S. each week dropped from falling at an average rate of 4,109 per week to just 766 per week all the way through 19 September 2010.
And that, in a nutshell, is what President Obama did to kill off the strong economic recovery President Obama inherited and replaced it with the weak jobs recovery that has dominated ever since. The major trends in U.S. layoffs through all this period is described here, which explains the letters shown on the chart above!
Since technical analysis is such a weak analytical technique, we thought we'd revisit that topic today using a combination of regression analysis and statistical analysis, focusing in on the one data metric that really defines a recession for most people: job layoffs.
Our chart below uses the Bureau of Labor Statistics' data for the seasonally-adjusted number of initial unemployment insurance benefit claims filed each week for the period spanning 6 July 2008 through 26 September 2010, which tracks the number of job layoffs that occurred during this period. We've annotated the chart to show the major events that coincided with major shifts in the trend in job layoffs or that affected the trend in data for short periods of time.
In the chart above, we've also indicated Mark Thoma's "effectiveness lag", which represents the typical amount of time from when federal government policies are implemented to when they have a noticeable impact, which he indicates is 6 to 18 months long. We note that economists have long recognized this real world phenomenon and that its existence is widely accepted (except perhaps by philosophy professors who would seem to care more about credentials than thought.)
Here, the chart shows that the rate of layoffs in the U.S. was increasing at an average rate of 7.599 per week from August 2008 up until they peaked in March 2009. Along the way, we note an unusual outlier where the number of layoffs plunged in late December-early January, which corresponds to the emergency bridge loan that the Bush administration extended to failing companies in the auto industry to avoid massive layoffs during the Christmas and New Year's holidays in the U.S.
Those massive layoffs were only postponed however to the period from mid-January 2009 through February 2009, as the number of weekly layoffs in the U.S. stopped rising and topped out at this time. Without the Bush administration bridge loan to the auto industry, we note that the peak in layoffs during the recession would have occurred earlier.
After topping out, the pace of layoffs began to fall at a rate of 4,109 per week, which held up through mid-November 2009. There is one near-outlier recorded during this period, which coincides with the Obama administration's "Cash for Clunkers" program, which temporarily saw the number of weekly layoffs fall while it ran. And then, because the program could no longer be sustained, the rate of layoffs in the U.S. resumed the path they had previously been on.
All that changed after 29 November 2009 however, which President Obama's signature achievement of his administration, the bill that the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (aka "ObamaCare") was introduced in the House of Representatives as H.R. 3962. The introduction of this bill, the result of the Democratic Party's supermajority in the U.S. Congress which meant it was likely to pass, and the uncertainty it unleashed for employers combined with the higher costs it mandated for them, derailed the economic recovery. We observe that derailment in the sudden deceleration of the pace of recovery as the number of layoffs in the U.S. each week dropped from falling at an average rate of 4,109 per week to just 766 per week all the way through 19 September 2010.
And that, in a nutshell, is what President Obama did to kill off the strong economic recovery President Obama inherited and replaced it with the weak jobs recovery that has dominated ever since. The major trends in U.S. layoffs through all this period is described here, which explains the letters shown on the chart above!
Jack Welch Refuses to Back Down on Unemployment Numbers in Fiery Exchange With Chris Matthews
By: Jason Howerton / The Blaze
In a heated debate with MSNBC’s Chris Matthews, former General
Electric CEO Jack Welch doubled-down on his claim that the Bureau of
Labor Statistics survey released Friday, which showed a spike in
employment and a drop in the unemployment metric from 8.1 percent to 7.8
percent, is bogus.
Welch explained his rationale to the MSNBC host:
“I have no evidence to prove that, I just raise the question,” he said.
“But you didn’t raise the question,” Matthews shot back.
“Did you talk to any economist or any people in the national income accounting world that understood how these numbers are put together before you accuse these ‘Chicago guys’ of changing the numbers?” the host asked.
Welch then repeated his position that the unemployment numbers were generated based on a “series of wild assumptions.”
Matthews then asked if he wanted to take back his accusation that the numbers were intentionally fudged.
“No,” Welch said defiantly. As Matthews grew frustrated with his guests defiance, he accused Welch of irresponsibly alleging wrongdoing by the president of the United States without probable cause. At this, Welch laughed — literally.
“It’s not funny, Jack…You’re talking about the President of the
United States playing with the Bureau of Labor Statistics’ numbers. This
is Nixon stuff. This is what Nixon said back in the old days,” Matthews
said.
“Chris, don’t lose it now,” Welch said.
“I’m not losing it. Look at my face. I’m not losing it,” Matthews said.
“Jack, do you want to take back the charge that there was corruption here,” Matthews asked again, getting the same answer.
“You don’t think it’s coincidental that we’ve got the biggest surge since 1983 in the jobs surge? Come on, Chris,” Welch said, refusing to back down. “It’s a six percent improvement in employment in two months…The numbers don’t jibe.”
He continued: “These numbers defy logic. They defy logic. We do not have a 4 to 5 percent booming economy with 873,000 people added. I mean, stop it, Chris. On the face of it, we don’t have this GDP. I love you, but you can’t get there.”
Matthews tried one more time to get Welch to walk his statement back, but it was useless. However, the guest did admit again that he has no “evidence whatsoever” of “corruption.”
Welch said he was just “raising the question for some good analysts to go look at.”
Watch the entire fiery segment via MSNBC:
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/jack-welch-refuses-to-back-down-on-unemployment-numbers-in-fiery-exchange-with-chris-matthews/
Welch explained his rationale to the MSNBC host:
“We had 600,000 government jobs added in the last two months. We had 873,00 jobs by a household survey — which is a total estimate — from 50,000 phone calls. Of those, 600,000 were temporary workers. Chris, these numbers are all a series of assumptions. Tons of assumptions. And it just seems somewhat coincidental that the month before the election, the numbers go one-tenth of a point below where the president started. Although, I don’t see anything in the economy that says these surges are true.”When Matthews asked him if he had any evidence to prove his assertion correct, Welch admitted that he did not.
“I have no evidence to prove that, I just raise the question,” he said.
“But you didn’t raise the question,” Matthews shot back.
“Did you talk to any economist or any people in the national income accounting world that understood how these numbers are put together before you accuse these ‘Chicago guys’ of changing the numbers?” the host asked.
Welch then repeated his position that the unemployment numbers were generated based on a “series of wild assumptions.”
Matthews then asked if he wanted to take back his accusation that the numbers were intentionally fudged.
“No,” Welch said defiantly. As Matthews grew frustrated with his guests defiance, he accused Welch of irresponsibly alleging wrongdoing by the president of the United States without probable cause. At this, Welch laughed — literally.
“I’m not losing it. Look at my face. I’m not losing it,” Matthews said.
“Jack, do you want to take back the charge that there was corruption here,” Matthews asked again, getting the same answer.
“You don’t think it’s coincidental that we’ve got the biggest surge since 1983 in the jobs surge? Come on, Chris,” Welch said, refusing to back down. “It’s a six percent improvement in employment in two months…The numbers don’t jibe.”
He continued: “These numbers defy logic. They defy logic. We do not have a 4 to 5 percent booming economy with 873,000 people added. I mean, stop it, Chris. On the face of it, we don’t have this GDP. I love you, but you can’t get there.”
Matthews tried one more time to get Welch to walk his statement back, but it was useless. However, the guest did admit again that he has no “evidence whatsoever” of “corruption.”
Welch said he was just “raising the question for some good analysts to go look at.”
Watch the entire fiery segment via MSNBC:
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/jack-welch-refuses-to-back-down-on-unemployment-numbers-in-fiery-exchange-with-chris-matthews/
Obama's true agenda is there for all to see...
EXECUTIVE ORDERS ISSUED...
Teddy Roosevelt: 3
NO others until FDR...NONE
FDR: 11 in 16 years
Truman: 5 in 7 years
Ike: 2 in 8 years
Kennedy: 4 in 3 years
LBJ: 4 in 5 years
Nixon: 1 in 6 years
Ford: 3 in 2 years
Carter: 3 in 4 years
Reagan: 5 in 8 years
Bush: 3 in 4 years
Clinton:5 in 8 years
George W. Bush: 62 in 8 years
Barack HUSSEIN Obama: 923 in 3-1/2 years!
Subject: Executive Orders .... where's the media? If you don't get the implications, you're not paying attention. How many warnings do you need?
923 Executive Orders in 40 Months!!!
During my lifetime, all Presidents have issued Executive Orders, for reasons that vary, some more than others.
When a President issued as many as 30 Executive Orders during a term in office, people thought there was something amiss.
WHAT DO YOU THINK ABOUT 923 EXECUTIVE ORDERS IN ONE PART OF ONE TERM? YES,
THERE IS A REASON...IT IS THAT THIS PRESIDENT IS DETERMINED TO TAKE
CONTROL AWAY FROM THE HOUSE AND THE SENATE.
Even some Democrats in the House have turned on him, plus a very small number of Democrat Senators question him.
HE SHOULD BE QUESTIONED. WHAT IS HE REALLY TRYING TO ACCOMPLISH?
DOES THIS SCARE YOU AS MUCH AS IT DOES ME?
Not really surprising that he appointed "Czars" to be in charge of
everything. Emperor Obama? Coming soon to a neighborhood near you.
THIS IS NOT FUNNY, AND IF YOU VOTE FOR HIM AGAIN, YOU CAN EXPECT MORE! Remember what he told Russia's Putin: "I'll be more flexible after I'm re-elected".
THE OBAMA ADMINISTRATION: Obama has signed 923 Executive Orders in 40 months!
What did Congress do in those 40 months? (The House... considerable.
The Senate...nothing, not even a budget nor allowing any House bill to
be considered.) A whole new order must prevail in Washingron DC as a result
of this next election!
Now look at these:
EXECUTIVE ORDER 10990 allows the government to take over all modes of transportation and control of highways and seaports.
EXECUTIVE ORDER 10995 allows the government to seize and control the communication media.
EXECUTIVE ORDER 10997 allows the government to take over all electrical power, gas, petroleum, fuels and minerals.
EXECUTIVE ORDER 10998 allows the government to take over all food resources and farms.
EXECUTIVE ORDER 11000 allows the government to mobilize civilians into work brigades under government supervision.
EXECUTIVE ORDER 11001 allows the government to take over all health, education and welfare functions.
EXECUTIVE ORDER 11002 designates the Postmaster General to operate a national registration of all persons.
EXECUTIVE ORDER 11003 allows the government to
take over all airports and aircraft, including commercial aircraft.
EXECUTIVE ORDER 11004 allows the Housing and Finance Authority to
relocate communities, build new housing with public funds, designate
areas to be abandoned, and establish new locations for populations.
EXECUTIVE ORDER 11005 allows the government to take over railroads, inland waterways and public storage facilities.
EXECUTIVE ORDER 11049 assigns emergency preparedness function to
federal departments and agencies, consolidating 21 operative Executive
Orders issued over a fifteen year period.
EXECUTIVE ORDER
11051 specifies the responsibility of the Office of Emergency Planning
and gives authorization to put all Executive Orders into effect in times
of increased international tensions and economic or financial crisis.
EXECUTIVE ORDER 11310 grants authority to the Department of Justice to
enforce the plans set out in Executive Orders, to institute industrial
support, to establish judicial and legislative liaison, to control all
aliens, to operate penal and correctional institutions, and to advise
and assist the President.
EXECUTIVE ORDER 11921 allows the
Federal Emergency Preparedness Agency to develop plans to establish
control over the mechanisms of production and distribution, of energy
sources, wages, salaries, credit and the flow of money in U.S. financial
institution in any undefined national emergency. It also provides that when a state of emergency is declared by the President, Congress cannot review the action for six months.
Feel free to verify the 'Executive Orders' at will... and these are
just the major ones.
Watch Obama's actions, not his words! By his actions he will show you where America is headed.
Just this week, Obama has issued a new executive order that seeks to 'harmonize' U.S. economic regulations with the rest of the world. This
new Executive Order is yet another incremental step that is pushing us
closer to a North American Union and a one world economic system.
Unfortunately, most Americans have absolutely no idea what is happening.
The American people need to understand that Barack HUSSEIN Obama is constantly
looking for ways to integrate the United States more deeply with the
rest of the world.
The globalization of the world economy has
accelerated under Obama, and this latest executive order represents a
fundamental change in U.S. economic policy.
Now federal regulators will be required to 'harmonize' their work with the international community.
THIS IS DIFFICULT TO BELIEVE? THEN PROVE TO YOURSELF IT'S WRONG. Just Google it!
Top Iranian official: All Iran needs is "24 hours and an excuse" to annihilate Israel
From Jihad Watch
Imagine if some top Israeli
official were speaking this way about Iran: the international outcry
would be shrill, immediate, intense and ongoing.
"Top Iranian Official: Iran Needs '24 Hours And An Excuse' To Annihilate Israel," from CBSDC, October 4 (thanks to Kenneth):
"Top Iranian Official: Iran Needs '24 Hours And An Excuse' To Annihilate Israel," from CBSDC, October 4 (thanks to Kenneth):
WASHINGTON (CBSDC) — A top Iranian official says that Iran will be able to annihilate Israel within a day.
According to The Jerusalem Post, Hojjat al-Eslam Ali Shirazi, representative to Iran’s Qods Force for Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, claims that all they need is “24 hours and an excuse” to attack the Jewish state.
“If such a war does happen, it would not be a long war, and it would benefit the entire Islamic umma [the global community of Muslims],” Shirazi said, according to the Post. “We have expertise in fighting wars of attrition and Israel cannot fight a war of attrition.”
Shirazi went on to say that Israel is “foolish” to believe that they can launch an attack on Iran to stop its nuclear development.
“[W]hen Israel finds itself in danger of extinction, it flails around, and so it’s easy for it to do foolish things and will start a war just to sting Iran.”
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has repeatedly hinted that an attack on Iran is possible if the Tehran regime continues progressing toward a nuclear weapon. Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad called Netanyahu “retarded” during a press conference in Tehran Tuesday after accusing the Israeli leader of being a war-monger.
“Whoever talks of war is retarded,” Ahmadinejad said, according to The Associated Press....But talk of genocide is just fine with him.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)