It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Unemployment rate hits 10.2% in October

page: 5
28
<< 2  3  4   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 7 2009 @ 03:31 AM
link   
It's funny... my wife is a speech language pathologist and she was hired by a local school who had been looking for an SLP for three years. (one of the few jobs in demand) Come to find out she is paid with the schools stimulus money...eventhough the school had allocated the funds for the position already. Now her job is considered "created or saved" by the stimulus package.

It's a farce.




posted on Nov, 7 2009 @ 04:48 AM
link   
I currently hate my job, that comes and goes though, but I feel that I must be very lucky right now to still have a job. I know soooo many people who are out of work, most are on or have been on unemployment checks, and in school, because they can't find work, but the checks don't last long enough to stay in school either. My little job is about to increase in weekly hours, thanks to the owners/managers leaving the country for a few months. I will get 40+ hours a week, while my friend who is a nurse cannot find work, and her unemployment ran out 3 months ago. My youngest sister worked 23 years for the same plant as a mechanic/fixer, the plant closed, she found another plant to go to, it closed, she found another, and it is now closing as well. I suppose she can go back to school too, but, doing the work she does is all she knows, what she loves, and she is damn good at it! Where are all the plant jobs going? Who is making carpet, the cotton materials, the denim, the Kahki? The auto parts? They have her job, and thousands of others!



posted on Nov, 7 2009 @ 05:54 AM
link   
reply to post by itguysrule
 





I wish all of the politicians could get past the name calling, finger pointing and trying to pin blame on each other. Blaming George Bush doesn't fix the problems. Let's try to fix the problems now and let the historians fix blame at a later date.


You can not fix a problem until you understand exactly what CAUSED the problem. I saw this coming twenty years ago when the company I worked for go hit by a corporate raider and torn apart.



Of mergers and acquisitions each costing $1 million or more, there were just 10 in 1970; in 1980, there were 94; in 1986, there were 346. A third of such deals in the 1980's were hostile. The 1980's also saw a wave of giant leveraged buyouts. Mergers, acquisitions and L.B.O.'s, which had accounted for less than 5 percent of the profits of Wall Street brokerage houses in 1978, ballooned into an estimated 50 percent of profits by 1988...

THROUGH ALL THIS, THE HISTORIC RELATIONSHIP between product and paper has been turned upside down. Investment bankers no longer think of themselves as working for the corporations with which they do business. These days, corporations seem to exist for the investment bankers....

In fact, investment banks are replacing the publicly held industrial corporations as the largest and most powerful economic institutions in America....

THERE ARE SIGNS THAT A VICIOUS spiral has begun, as each corporate player seeks to improve its standard of living at the expense of another's. Corporate raiders transfer to themselves, and other shareholders, part of the income of employees by forcing the latter to agree to lower wages. - January 29, 1989 New York Times



Then in 1995 Clinton ratified the World Trade Organization and sent the rest of our industry over seas.

When Congress and Obama doubled the money supply in three months the first of this year and I knew we were doomed especially with the fractional banking multiplier effect.

If you read Secrets of the Federal Reserve you can see the corporate raiders of the eighties mirror the speculators of the roaring twenties, both funded by the bankers and the crash is the same, caused by the bankers with the bankers cleaning up all the wealth for pennies on the dollar.


The "bank bailouts" was a fairy tale. If a banker lends a $100,000 for a mortgage he actually lends between $0 and $3,000 dollars in real money , the rest is fairy dust. That money is repaid in three months then he collects $170,000 in interest on NOTHING. So someone explain how banks are "loosing " money when all they are loosing is fairy dust created by the stroke of a key. See A Talk by G. Edward Griffin Author of The Creature from Jekyll Island

Market Skeptics explains how "US banks are already operating free of any reserve constraints. The graph below shows reserve requirements falling to zero over the last fifty years."



The American public has been screwed and the politicians held a gun to our heads and allowed the bankers to ream us good. 100% of our taxes now go straight to the bankers to pay the interest on the loan of money, created out of nothing by the Federal Reserves counterfeiting checkbook. A checkbook without one red cent in it. The US treasury could have printed that same money with no interest but the politicians gave up those rights to the bankers in 1913 so now we are serfs of the bankers. The US treasury still prints the money but now we have to pay the bankers for the privilege.

Obama and Bush and no doubt most of the other Democrats and republicans are in the pockets of the banker/corporate cartel. THAT is the real problem. Harvard Business school grads have ruined every department or company where I have seen them at work. Skimp on raw materials, quality and maintenance, screw the workers - show a huge increase in profits and move on to the next company before the results of the cost cutting hit. (One plant had a plastics extruder blow up killing several thanks to skimped on maintenance)

My hubby ran into a new Economics grad who did not know a thing about the FED! Guess who has controlled the economics departments since 1910?




These fellows were not stupid. You have to give them credit. They didn't get to be where they were by being country bumpkins. They understood politics, they understood mass psychology and they played their cards exceedingly well. Meanwhile these same individuals out of their own pockets were paying the price for the costs of bringing up what they called grassroots study clubs all over the country. They sponsored these clubs and they held public meetings and printed brochures and pamphlets extolling the virtues of the Federal Reserve System. They gave large amounts of money to some of the better known universities in America; they created newly formed departments of economics with that money; they hand picked their own people to be the professors to head up those departments and then those professors with all of their academic credentials gave speeches and wrote scholarly essays extolling the virtues of the Federal Reserve System. And then at the insistence of Paul Warburg who was forever the master strategist, they added several very sound provisions to the Federal Reserve Bill. By that I mean they added some provisions which seriously restricted the ability of the Federal Reserve to create money out of nothing. Warburg's associates said, "Paul, what are you doing? We don't want those in there this is our bill." And his response was this, he said, "Relax fellas, don't you get it? Our object is to get the bill passed. We can fix it up later." Those were his exact words. "We can fix it up later." He was so right. It was because of those provisions that they won over the support of William Jennings Bryan the head of the Populist Movement, the last hold-out against the bill. Bryan was concerned that this would be an instrument for ruining the nation's money supply but when he saw those provisions he said, "Oh well, those are good provisions, I guess I can support the bill now" never dreaming that this was temporary. Everything is temporary in politics. When people go to sleep things can get changed. A Talk by G. Edward Griffin Author of The Creature from Jekyll Island





It was all planned folks and they have just about finished sucking the USA dry. "..In 1990,before WTO was ratified, Foreign ownership of U.S. assets amounted to 33% of U.S. GDP. By 2002 this had increased to over 70% of U.S. GDP..." www.fame.org...



This transformation was the result of organized plans developed by a group of highly powerful – though unelected – financial and industrial executives ... This group, called the Committee for Economic Development, was officially established in 1942 as a sister organization to the Council on Foreign Relations. CED has influenced US domestic policies in much the same way that the CFR has influenced the nation’s foreign policies.

...Their plan was so effective and so faithfully executed by its operatives in the US government that by 1974 the CED couldn’t help but congratulate itself..."
History, HACCP and the Food Safety Con Job


In Sept. 14, 1994 David Rockefeller, speaking at the UN Business Council.

"This present window of opportunity, during which a truly peaceful and interdependent world order might be built, will not be open for too long - We are on the verge of a global transformation. All we need is the right major crisis and the nations will accept the New World Order."



In a speech on July 7, 2009 Al Gore proclaimed, “I bring you good news from the U.S....Just two weeks ago, the House of Representatives passed the Waxman-Markey climate bill...very much a step in the right direction....“But it is the awareness itself that will drive the change and one of the ways it will drive the change is through global governance and global agreements.”

And David Rockefeller puts it even more bluntly while speaking at the Bilderberger meeting in June 1991 in Baden Baden

“The supernational sovereignty of an intellectual elite and world bankers is surely preferable to the national autodetermination practiced in past centuries.”













[edit on 7-11-2009 by crimvelvet]



posted on Nov, 7 2009 @ 08:26 AM
link   
reply to post by crimvelvet
 


I would like to add to this statement of yours.


The "bank bailouts" was a fairy tale. If a banker lends a $100,000 for a mortgage he actually lends between $0 and $3,000 dollars in real money , the rest is fairy dust. That money is repaid in three months then he collects $170,000 in interest on NOTHING. So someone explain how banks are "loosing " money when all they are loosing is fairy dust created by the stroke of a key.


It goes even further than that. Everybody is force to pay Mortgage Insurance that pays the bank if you don't. So how much do they loose again?



posted on Nov, 7 2009 @ 08:40 AM
link   
Yea, I feel sorry for the banks. They are currently getting a .25% discount rate for the money they borrow from the Fed, while they are scrambling to raise interest rates on credit cards to 30%, and in some cases to 79.9%, for maximum profit--but of course the actual profit margin is much larger, because the credit provided on the cards is largely fairy dust, created out of thin air.

Congress is making a big ballyhoo about the credit card reform bill that will take effect in January. But in actual fact, that bill does not limit the amount of interest the banks can charge on the credit cards, but merely requires the banks to "notify" customers of rate increases in advance. Once again, Congress has sold us out to the banks.

When are people going to wake up and vote out the scumbag incumbents, the whole lot of them--both Republican and Democrat--and replace them with principled, honest, hard-working citizens who have our best interests in mind, rather than the corporate and banking lobbyists?



posted on Nov, 7 2009 @ 09:04 AM
link   
reply to post by David9176
 




One word:

NAFTA.

Free trade my ass.

Where is a leader who is screaming against NAFTA? WHERE IS HE? Who in the hell stands up for American workers?

Anyone???? Anyone out there at all????

We need to demand a reform or a repeal of NAFTA now!!!


How about adding the World Trade Organization treaty. Bye the bye, YOUR state can nullify a treaty!!! It is called Nullification

The Constitution is not superceded by treaties.


HERE ARE THE CLEAR IRREFUTABLE FACTS: The U.S. Supreme Court has made it very clear that

1) Treaties do not override the U.S. Constitution.
2) Treaties cannot amend the Constitution. And last,
3) A treaty can be nullified by a statute passed by the U.S. Congress (or by a sovereign State or States if Congress refuses to do so), when the State deems a treaty the performance of a treaty is self-destructive. The law of self-preservation overrules the law of obligation in others. When you've read this thoroughly, hopefully, you will never again sit quietly by when someone -- anyone -- claims that treaties supercede the Constitution. Help to dispell this myth.

"This [Supreme] Court has regularly and uniformly recognized the supremacy of the Constitution over a treaty." - Reid v. Covert, October 1956, 354 U.S. 1, at pg 17.
This case involved the question: Does the NATO Status of Forces Agreement (treaty) supersede the U.S. Constitution? Keep reading.

The Reid Court (U.S. Supreme Court) held in their Opinion that,
"... No agreement with a foreign nation can confer power on the Congress, or any other branch of government, which is free from the restraints of the Constitution. Article VI, the Supremacy clause of the Constitution declares, "This Constitution and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof; and all the Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land...’


"In effect, such construction would permit amendment of that document in a manner not sanctioned by Article V. The prohibitions of the Constitution were designed to apply to all branches of the National Government and they cannot be nullified by the Executive or by the Executive and Senate combined."

Did you understand what the Supreme Court said here? No Executive Order, Presidential Directive, Executive Agreement, no NAFTA, GATT/WTO agreement/treaty, passed by ANYONE, can supersede the Constitution. FACT. No question!


Assessing the GATT/WTO parasitic organism in light of this part of the Opinion, we see that it cannot attach itself to its host (our Republic or States) in the fashion the traitors in our government wish, without our acquiescing to it.
The Reid Court continues with its Opinion:

"This Court has also repeatedly taken the position that an Act of Congress, which MUST comply with the Constitution, is on full parity with a treaty, the statute to the extent of conflict, renders the treaty null. It would be completely anomalous to say that a treaty need not comply with the Constitution when such an agreement can be overridden by a statute that must conform to that instrument."

The U.S. Supreme court could not have made it more clear : TREATIES DO NOT OVERRIDE THE CONSTITUTION, AND CANNOT, IN ANY FASHION, AMEND IT !!! CASE CLOSED.

Source ...www.sweetliberty.org...


We need to regain control of our states and push through the 10th Amendment Resolutions States CAN over rid idiotic Federal laws.

Sate nullification of the Real ID act is a case in point



REAL ID Act Led by Maine in early 2007, 25 states over the past 2 years have passed resolutions and binding laws denouncing and refusing the implement the Bush-era law which many expressed concerned about privacy, funding and more. While the law is still on the books in D.C., its implementation has been “delayed” numerous times in response to this massive state resistance, and in practice, is virtually null and void.

www.tenthamendmentcenter.com...


Our biggest problem is the The Commerce Clause



Enter Roscoe Filburn, an Ohio dairy and poultry farmer, who raised a small quantity of winter wheat — some to sell, some to feed his livestock, and some to consume. In 1940, under authority of the Agricultural Adjustment Act, the central government told Mr. Filburn that for the next year he would be limited to planting 11 acres of wheat and harvesting 20 bushels per acre. He harvested 12 acres over his allotment for consumption on his own property. When the government fined him, Mr. Filburn refused to pay.

Wickard v. Filburn got to the Supreme Court, and in 1942, the justices unanimously ruled against the farmer. The government claimed that if Mr. Filburn grew wheat for his own use, he would not be buying it — and that affected interstate commerce. It also argued that if the price of wheat rose, which is what the government wanted, Mr. Filburn might be tempted to sell his surplus wheat in the interstate market, thwarting the government's objective. The Supreme Court bought it


The Court's opinion must be quoted to be believed:
[The wheat] supplies a need of the man who grew it which would otherwise be reflected by purchases in the open market. Home-grown wheat in this sense competes with wheat in commerce.
As Epstein commented, "Could anyone say with a straight face that the consumption of home-grown wheat is 'commerce among the several states?'" ...

After Wickard , everything is mere detail....Under this maximum commerce power, the government has been free to regulate nearly everything... The Court has held that if Congress sees a connection to interstate commerce, it is not its role to second guess.





posted on Nov, 7 2009 @ 12:16 PM
link   
Yep 10.2% sounds about right. I've been laid off for a year now and still can't find a job. I even went to McDonalds and they turned me away! Just waiting and silll looking....



posted on Nov, 7 2009 @ 12:57 PM
link   
I couldn't believe that the government actually reported a 10% unemployment rate, I never thought they would admit it (maybe that should be moved to 20% now, especially after New Year's when real unemployment/underemployment will probably hit 25% or higher).

If all the brainpower (for lack of more descriptive wording) in Washington, combined with business, concentrated on real sustainable job creation instead of this b.s. healthcare distraction (that will never be), maybe the country can set itself back on the right path, but of course that would make sense and couldn't happen.

I feel as if the blade is now just starting to fall and sometime around New Year it will impact. Get yourself prepared



posted on Nov, 7 2009 @ 01:53 PM
link   
Honestly, this wasnt supposed to happen till the early Spring of 2010 (remember the analysts?) so based on a simple recalculation of the moving average we will be looking at 12-12.5% UER across the board. Bad news, im not sure how much more jobs the economy can continue to shed.

This month, last month and till Dec 25 we will have a boost of hiring in preparation for the christmas season. So we are going to have to serouisly sit down and look at the data in feb.

Job losses will be huge in January, if jobs outlook is not better by Feb. We have reached the tipping point. We crossed over mahoneys peak into a depression. Cause consumer spending would of reached the point where it can longer fuel retail hiring and the cycle will feed on itself for along time.


Something to think about. Febuary economic and employment data will be CRITICAL to validate wether we are still just stabilized on the bottom or wether we are in an actual recovery. It is D-Day. if the spending is weak, hiring is weak, unemployment will always surge after holiday layoffs.

We are in big....big....trouble for similiar collapse of the markets to what happened last year.

[edit on 7-11-2009 by senorbobcentury]



posted on Nov, 7 2009 @ 06:44 PM
link   
Add 15% to that for the real underemployment numbers, I am talking about those that have a job but are working part time 24 hours a week, but they want a full time job at 40 hours a week. Since this is all they can find and beggars can't be choosy in this market now. So unemployment and under- employment combined would be sitting at 25%.

That's 75 million people underemployed!

With those types of numbers no wonder the economy is screwed.



posted on Nov, 7 2009 @ 11:54 PM
link   
You can play around with numbers all you like, but they don't mean a whole lot. We're grasping at straws, seeking answers when none are forthcoming.

The 10.2% unemployment rate, to my understanding, only takes into account the people who are eligible for benefits. It doesn't count the people who have been unemployed so long that they are no longer eligible for unemployment benefits. The actual number is probably significantly higher than 10.2%

There's no way to tell what effect the recovery package had. We simply don't know enough about economics to make any firm claims one way or the other. You can always claim that it averted an even worse tragedy; or you can claim that it is responsible for the tragedy we have already seen. There's no way to know which is which.

I think to get out of this depression, we'll need to make some actual changes to how we do business, not just try to do some cosmetic changes without modiying the fundamental structure. For instance, we have an insane reliance on credit, which is one of the main reaons we're in this mess. Most of our wealth is imaginary. We need to stop using imaginary money for real things.



posted on Nov, 8 2009 @ 08:16 AM
link   
These numbers will continue to go up because it is almost winter. Northern states will be laying off a majority of their construction workers. Don't get you panties in a bunch. The rates will be lower in the spring.



posted on Nov, 8 2009 @ 10:06 AM
link   
The reality is government never produces anything and any government job inherently takes away from the production and progress of society, since the government job is stolen off the backs of productive workers.

Therefore, the solution is to cut government and government "jobs" since they are not productive jobs, they are inherently un-productive and even destructive more times than not. Of course you need the basics, police, fire dept, highways, etc., but anything beyond the absolutely necesary functions of government universally destroys production.

I always like this story from China some years ago. There was a construction site and there were 10,000 workers with shovels all digging and working for the State. An American bystander asked the Chinese official in charge why not bring in modern excavators and machinery so that the job can be done quicker, more efficiently, and far cheaper with only 100 or so workers actually needed. The Chinese official looked shocked and said well what would happen to all these jobs?!

What would happen is those workers would work in ways that would actually benefit society by producing something and not operating on the basis of theivery of production of others. This is what statists don't seem to understand or just don't want to understand.

That is why any jobs created or saved by stimilus or any other government intervention are not really jobs either created or saved, they are jobs stolen off the backs of the producers of the country, either through taxation, excessive borrowing, or pure inflation.

For more on this philosophy I recommend people read Frederic Bastiat's work. The man is my hero and should be for any Ron Paulian, Libertarian, or Constitutionalist...



posted on Nov, 8 2009 @ 11:24 AM
link   
reply to post by chiron613
 



There's no way to tell what effect the recovery package had. We simply don't know enough about economics to make any firm claims one way or the other. You can always claim that it averted an even worse tragedy; or you can claim that it is responsible for the tragedy we have already seen. There's no way to know which is which.


Horsepucky! It's called 'HISTORY' and it's there for us to learn from. Ever heard of the Depression of 1920? There's a reason why. The gov't stayed out of the way and the FREE Market corrected itself. Let's not be willfully ignorant, blaming things on the weather and our inability to figure it out.



new topics

top topics



 
28
<< 2  3  4   >>

log in

join