The American Spectator : A 'Recovery' in Reverse

Text Size

A ‘Recovery’ in Reverse

We’re supposed to stay patient as things keep getting worse?

They say the economy is moving in the right direction, that we should stay the course, be patient, that it takes time to pull out of the recession that began in late 2007.

In fact, things are getting worse.

The economy was creating 153,000 new jobs per month last year. That dropped during the first seven months of this year to an average of 139,000 per month. In August, we were down to 96,000.

It takes over 100,000 new jobs per month just to stay even with the number of people entering the labor force. It would take double that number for over a decade to bring today’s jobless rate down to the unemployment levels of 2007.

Factory payrolls were cut by 15,000 in August, the biggest decline in two years and a strong reversal of the 23,000 gain in factory payrolls in July.

The dip in the official unemployment rate from 8.3 percent in July to 8.1 percent in August was due to 368,000 people dropping out of the labor force.

The labor participation rate, the share of the working-age population in the labor force (as either employed or unemployed), dropped to 63.5 percent in August, the lowest labor participation rate in over three decades.

This decline in the labor participation rate, the increase in dropping out, is due in large part to the extended duration of unemployment in the current economy. “The average length out of the job market continues to be a stunning 39 weeks,” reported the Wall Street Journal (“The Jobs Deficit,” September 10, 2012), “compared to an average duration of between 15 and 20 weeks from 1984-2008.”

Today’s unemployment rate would be 10.1 percent if the labor participation rate was the same as it was in February 2010, when the job market allegedly bottomed.

And that’s not counting the officially estimated 8.0 million people who were classified as “involuntary part-time workers” by the Labor Department in August, i.e., workers with “hours cut” and people working part-time and “unable” to find full-time work, all not counted as unemployed.

Economic growth, too, is moving in the wrong d irection. After expanding at an annual rate of 4.1 percent in the fourth quarter of 2011, economic growth slowed to 2.1 percent during the first three months of 2012, and slowed again to 1.7 percent from April through June of this year.

It takes double the 1.7 percent rate of growth to bring down the unemployment rate.

Measured against previous recessions and recoveries, federal reports show we’re doing about half as well as average. “The Joint Economic Committee reports that private payrolls have climbed only 4.3 percent in the last 30 months compared to a rate of 8.3 percent over a comparable time period for the other nine recoveries since World War II,” reports the Wall Street Journal.

Over the past year, the average annual wage increase of 1.7 percent was the lowest increase in three decades, and too low to stay even with inflation.

Gasoline prices hit $3.80 per gallon on Labor Day, the highest price ever recorded during a Labor Day weekend — and double the $1.79 price on Inauguration Day, January 20, 2009.

Retail food prices rose 3.7 percent last year. This year, the U.S. Department of Agriculture is forecasting a 3.5 percent to 4.5 percent increase in beef prices.

The impact of this failing economy on paychecks? Income data from the Census Bureau show that the median household income, adjusted for inflation, dropped by $4,019 from January 2009 to June 2012.

About the Author

Ralph R. Reiland is the B. Kenneth Simon professor of free enterprise and an associate professor of economics at Robert Morris University in Pittsburgh.

Letter to the Editor View all comments (47) | Leave a comment Leave a comment

The Avenger| 9.17.12 @ 7:07AM

4 more years of Obama's policies should about do us in. By that time real unemployment will be 20%, the number of claims on S.S. "disablity" will be enough to collapse the program, and those who think the productive in the society can support it all will get the surprise of their lives. Welcome to the post U.S. world. The ignorant among us are now making the most important choice to ever face this country. God help us.

Robert| 9.17.12 @ 12:05PM

I'd say obama is doing pretty well. The Clovis-Pivens/Saul Alinsky strategy to distract, degrade, isolate, confuse, obfuscate while loading down the welfare state with increasing entitlements while destroying the producers is right on schedule.

Another 4 years of this scheme should so soften the fabric of American society we will be begging for a Fuehrer to get us out of the mess.

We won't need to look far, as the current one will save us the trouble and expense of having to elect him Chancellor before the Fuehrer declaration is announced.

Alan Obama Fan Brooks | 9.17.12 @ 2:52PM

But America is old-fashioned, and you would have won in '92, '96, and '08 if you'd run better candidates.-- ultimately you brought this upon yourselves.
Your wounds are self-inflicted.

Purp| 9.17.12 @ 8:27AM

Interestingly, we were getting better until the 2010 elections put Republicans in charge of the House of Representatives.

The Republicans specifically planned to obstruct any and all moves by this President to improve the economy.

They laugh while America suffers - so if you don't like it, blame yourselves for electing the "Do-nothing" Congress that is more interested in abortion legislation and drowning the government in a bathtub than they are in Americans getting JOBS.

The House of Representatives is a disgrace and their approval rating shows America agrees.

Truth to Power| 9.17.12 @ 9:17AM

Nobody is laughing but gay money bundlers and they are laughing all the way to their bank. It is time for a change. The big O has got to go back to Chicago to enjoy the fruits of his community organizing.

SUBVET| 9.17.12 @ 10:16AM

I here he's going to Hawaii his housein Chicago is up for sale....to many shootings in the HOOD.

Mimi | 9.17.12 @ 10:12AM

Purp ...You must know all you say is not TRUE !!
The House has all kinds of helpful legislation passed and sent over to the Senate....All held back by the likes of HARRY REED and obeying YOU KNOW WHO!
The BAIN/BRAIN and his helpers will fix it PROPERLY...This man hired men of genius who created the best of the best ideas to solve just these kind of problems...His smart wife knew he had the KNOW HOW to FIX THIS...so after saying in 2008 "never again" she went to him and said ..."MITT you know what we must do"
When he gets us going...people get back to work...not just making peanuts our going DOWNHILL the OBAMA WAY will come to an end. I just hope people will be grateful for their sacrifice and service to this country....We are so lucky to have this kind of fantastic TALENT willing to SERVE!
Purp Give it up ...I usually don't waste time responding to your NONSENSE and won't any time soon. But you are hurting this NATION trying to dis-spirit this country with untruths to get your guy ...who so wrongly served us elected again to prevent us from growing and thriving again!

SUBVET| 9.17.12 @ 10:21AM

Purp knows he's part of the problem......so why does everyone at TAS engage him.

My parrents used to say just ignore him and he will go away.

Purp| 9.17.12 @ 1:17PM

Puhlease, my dear - "Politics is the Art of Compromise" - have you heard any compromises coming from the TeaPUblicans? No you haven't.

Passing a bill in the House when you are in the majority is not legislating. It's pushing your ideology, which of course, the Democratic Senate rejects.

Why else would the House pass "Repeal of Obamacare" 33 times? Did they think the Senate would agree on the 33rd time?

As far as their budgets - in the same boat - bills will never become law if they are strictly ideological and the House Republicans cannot raise any revenue, even 10 spending cuts to 1 revenue raise - Grover Norquist won't let them... He's their boss and Rush Loudmouth is the mouthpiece to keep them in line.

So, "Do-nothing" while America is hurting. Where are the JOBS, Mr Boehner. 2010 was all about JOBS, remember?

They have passed the Obamacare bills, umpteen abortion bills and post office renaming- but not the President's American Jobs Act - why not?

You know full well they have no intention of helping America and let the President look good.

They are strictly playing politics and America be d**ned. The House Republicans are a disgrace and should be thrown out in November.

George S| 9.17.12 @ 2:55PM

First of all, the country voted for Obama for president, not Boehner. He answers to a portion of the people in Ohio. The Republicans were given the House in 2010 to stop the Democrat agenda, not to reverse things. We are not stupid and we -- unlike Democrats -- know and respect the limits of the Constitution.

Second, there is no need for the Jobs Act. The stimulus fixed everything. You told us yourself. Besides, that Act could have been proposed in early 2009 -- a time when Republicans could not stop anything and were even shut out of the process (remember "I Won"?). Also, the Bush tax cuts could have been rescinded as well raising taxes on millionaires and billionaires. But they never transpired because the Obamas were waiting for the business cycle to reverse and they didn't want anything getting in the way of the stimulus taking the credit. They needed the stimulus to be front and center as the economy recovered on its own so as to both restore the reputation of Lord Keynes and forever discredit Reagan and Bush and any notion of cutting taxes yields economic growth.

Purp| 9.17.12 @ 6:48PM

He's the Speaker of the House - 3rd in line to the Presidency! And you downplay his power?

Republicans were given the House to create JOBS - that's what they campaigned on - not abortion, not repealing Obamacare.

Constitutional Limits? Really?
Please tell me where in the Constitution it says a gay man cannot marry another?

Please tell me where it says women must submit to government mandated VAGINAL ultrasound probes as in Virginia?

Please tell me where it says we need a voter ID to exercise our Constitutional right to vote?

Please tell me in the Constitution where it says an abortion is illegal?

Selective reading of the Constitution is just that.
The Stimulus was held less than desired because 3 Republican Senators were needed to vote for it and they forced changes to the bill.

Bush tax cuts were held hostage to extend unemployment benefits for workers and some other things Republicans traded for.

"I won" translates to "Elections have consequences" - something Republicans said during the 2000's but didn't accept from Obama.

Tax cuts don't yield economic growth, never have, never will. Reagan raised taxes 11 times during his 8 years... hardly a tax cutter, huh?

George - your ideas are so misguided it's getting easy to discount them with facts and truth to easily.

JP| 9.17.12 @ 10:40AM

Purp, the economy actually grew in 2011. Did you read the article? Q4 growth was at 4.1%.

And in case you foregotten, the GOP lead House has passed on 2 budgets to Harry Reid (for FYI 2011, and for FY 2012). Reid simplly thew them in the trash. You Libs are absurd. Our government has spent and borrowed over $5.1 trillion since 2009, and that hasn't the expected GDP growth. Yet, you blame the GOP for "doing nothing". What is it? If the GOP had its way, it would have stopped the huge borrowing some 3 years ago.

The Bush Recession ended just months after Obama's inaugeration (June 2009). Since then, it has been treading water. And next year the Obama tax increases begin in full force.

Purp| 9.17.12 @ 2:42PM

Grew in 2011 - yes, a result of policies in 2009 and 2010 - and when was the new House Majority sworn in?

Uh - Jan 2011 ... it's the economy in 2012 that reflects what did or did not happen in 2011.

1) 2011 is when the Republican House threatened to shut down the Government.
2) 2011 is when Republican House threatened to let the National Debt Ceiling lapse.
3) 2011 is when America's Bond rating was slashed, with the agency blaming Congress.
4) 2011 is when the Republican House threatened to let the payroll tax cut lapse.
5) 2011 is when the Republican House voted to repeal Obamacare 33 times.

So you see, the economy in 2012 is a direct result of the dereliction of duty by the House Republicans in 2011. Businesses are frightened, Americans are frightened, because nobody knows WHAT this House of Republicans is going to do to screw America next.

George S| 9.17.12 @ 2:57PM

So that means that 2008 was the result of the policies of the 2007 Pelosi House?

You cannot have it both ways.

What am I saying, of course you can when you are intellectually dishonest.

Purp| 9.17.12 @ 6:39PM

No, but you miss the critical difference - the House and Senate in Democratic hands did not try to blackmail the White House and threatening the economic health or security of the American people.
The derelict Republican House of Representative s elected in 2010 DID do that. They should be thrown out on their ear. They tried to hurt America to win the next election.

aware| 9.17.12 @ 11:50AM

I wish we could get a "do nothing Congress". We wouldn't be in the mess we are in if we just had a few of those. Do nothing "government" would be even better.

Purp| 9.17.12 @ 1:10PM

You have one - only 61 bills have made it to law out of 2900 ! Quite a record of "Do-nothing" ... !

aware| 9.17.12 @ 3:24PM

My score card says 0 bills passed would be do nothing. 61 is 61 too many.

Alan Obama Fan Brooks | 9.17.12 @ 2:56PM

Purp,
these Harry Hairshirts can't deal with how they hurt their own interests with their Bushes, McCains, Doles, Romneys.

But their loss is someone else's gain-- and that hurts even more.

Bob K| 9.17.12 @ 9:16AM

People start running out of patience when the economy tanks. The faster it tanks the faster their patience disappears. Witness Egypt where the government there changed somewhat faster than it changes in western democracies. It will change here too. The sooner the better because if the incompetent government now in charge of the current mess continues in power the political upheaval during the next 2 to 4 year election cycle will not be pleasant to see or easy to control.

Jacob McCandles| 9.17.12 @ 10:44AM

I'm beginning to wonder if you are correct, Bob. Are 200 million people who don't contribute to the federal government running out of patience? Are the welfare moms running out of patience? Are the 20 somethings living off of their parents still patient?

It's all about comfort- having shelter, food, and a little money to spend on a flat screen TV. Sure, the producers are running out of patience. But we are dwindling in numbers as the leeches remain pleasantly sated, fat and happy.

Von Mises Jr| 9.17.12 @ 9:34AM

The numbers do not even come close to depicting the real tragedy of the Obama regime.
The stock market is up only due to massive money infusion by the Federal Reserve in Stimulus ($787B), QE2 and Operation Twist, and now QE3 while volume is anemic. Banks are only lending to the Treasury that is called "monetizing the debt." Qualified borrowers will not borrow since they are smart enough to be the qualified customers and know better. Business starts are at an all time low. The United States was just downgraded to AA- last week.
And it all comes crashing down in January if Obama is re-elected. When the Bush rates sunset, a family earning $50K has their taxes go up by $400 per month. With the "Islamic Scorched Summer," gas prices and heating oil may skyrocket almost immediately.
BTW, ignore that jackass Perp who seems fascinated by the word "interesting" today. If there is one thing Perp is not, it is interesting.

2Anglico| 9.17.12 @ 10:23AM

Remember, it was the donkey party that started all this. They were the ones threatening to sue banks that did not have a loan portfolio that matched their "diversity" targets/quotas. The dung hit the fan in January of 2007 when the donkey party took control of the House AND Senate. It has been downhill ever since. THERE HAS NOT BEEN ANY PROGRESS GETTING OUT OF THIS RECESSION. In fact it has only gotten worse. When was the last official budget? The donkeys got around Bush's veto pen with "continuing resolutions" and then the Republican Congress wimped out and continued the "CR" fiasco.
The Fed is "buying" debt, what a joke. A great calamity is on the horizon.

Purp| 9.17.12 @ 2:54PM

You are completely wrong. Republicans pushed for lax regulation and the end to the Glass-Steagal act in 1999, which allowed, under Bush, for financial shenanigans and Wall Street abuses to occur.

Follow the money, if you want to know who's at fault - and it isn't the little homeowner. Who got rich of off the Wall Street schemes? Who's buddies were the Wall Streeters - Republicans, Jack Abramoff, Tom Delay, K Street Lobby Mill, etc.

Facts are pesky little things, aren't they?

Moreover, in the United States Congress, a joint resolution is a legislative measure that requires approval by the Senate and the House and is presented to the President for his/her approval or disapproval, in exactly the same case as a bill ...

So the President (Bush in this case above) had to sign it into law. The Democrats did not get around any veto... Bush signed it.

George S| 9.17.12 @ 3:09PM

None of that would have happened without Fannie selling mortgages. That caused the government-backed rating agencies to misstate the risks of the securities. Combine that with Fannie buying more and more securities to overstate their risk. The more Fannie sold, the more Wall Street had to play with. And the more money the directors of Fannie and Freddie made. What other bureaucrats take in 15 million zabloneys in commission? And then get to sit on the committees that trey to "find" what went wrong.

Glass-Steagall is a red herring.

Purp| 9.17.12 @ 4:24PM

Trouble with your argument is that Fannie and Freddie DID NOT sell mortgages to Wall Street - the banks did. And, THAT's where the big problem existed.

Follow the money, GS, and you'll know the abuse of the system and the main problem rested with Wall Streeters. Fannie and Freddie were left holding the bag, just as AIG was.

As Wall Street devised more and more complex security instruments they could sell, they "pulled" more and more mortgages from the banks and incented them to sell more and riskier loans. Fine with the banks since they passed on the risk to Wall Street who sliced and diced mortgages and passed them onto their investors.

Once concern set in for mounting defaults, investors ran for the hills and the House that Wall Street built started to crumble - and then it affected Fannie and Freddie, and every other entity involved, including AIG, Merrill Lynch and so many others.

The Glass-Stegall repeal allowed banks to become investment houses as well and play Las Vegas with depositor's money. Phil Gramm and Dick Armey, Republicans, were instrumental in pushing it through in 1999 (and Democrats went along with it, of course)

Moe Blotz| 9.17.12 @ 10:12PM

Ms. Purp, you neglected to mention the millions of $$$ Jon Corzine, D-New Juhsey pocketed from all the shenanigans. Franklin Raines, Jamie Gorelick, million dollar bonuses for running Fannie and Freddie into the ground. Harry Reid did rather well also, if you follow the money it leads to Democrats.

Bill8472| 9.17.12 @ 3:10PM

Lots of people benefited from the so-called "Wall Street schemes," which were nothing more or less than sophisticated bankers, financial brokers, and smart investors trying to find a way to make money off the government policy of pushing mortgage lenders to make risky mortgage loans to people who lacked the ability to pay those mortgages.

Yes, due to government policy people who otherwise wouldn't own a house got to own a house for a few years. Then it turned out that they couldn't maintain the mortgage payments and they defaulted. The housing market then began to implode and the financial brokerage houses began to have financial trouble as the mortgages they had bought at such low discounts turned to be worthless. So the financial houses had to be propped up for some reason, instead of going into bankruptcy. TARP was the result (thanks a lot, President Bush) when the brokerage houses should have just gone into Chapter 11 bankruptcy instead of sucking up taxpayer money.

Then Obama lent money to the Detroit automakers because they had to fund their pension programs instead of putting the money into R&D on cars that could actually compete internationally. They should have gone into Chapter 11 bankruptcy too.

But no, we had Obama; government had to shove its big nose into that brouhaha.

Warrior| 9.17.12 @ 10:41AM

What you need to add is that the banks have no incentive to actually loan money at these rates. As long as the Fed pumps more bogus cash into the system, the interest rates will stay this low. However, if the banks actually start loaning the money, the infusion into the economy will cause hyper-inflation. This is a lose, lose situation for us. You are spot on as the federal pumping is keeping stock prices artificially inflated. As I stated above, should any semblance normalcy return, the stock market will have to "adjust" and reduce to its proper level from the artificial high.

Von Mises Jr| 9.17.12 @ 10:50AM

Exactly, Warrior. Why lend to private sector borrowers at 4% in view of a fiscal cliff when the government will pay T-Bill Coupons Rates of 3% and they can just print money to cover their insolvency.
The former is a financial "Specific" risk, while the latter is simply a market risk. So if the market collapses, everyone loses. But private borrowers include the risk of individual default and not a good risk for banks.
Of course Wall Street also has made massive investments in hard assets and they are butt-boys with the regime. So it pays to sell out the people for a seat at the table.

aware| 9.17.12 @ 11:42AM

Hyper-inflationary economic destruction or a deflationary event that dwarfs the Great Depression, the only possibilities now.

And anybody thinking this is all Obama(ironically the same half wits who berate Obama for his equally ridiculous "blame Bush") must have a bag over their head. It's the only explanation for not knowing who the hell is beating the crap out of you!

The blame is 100% Alan Greenspan and his demon possessed successor. The predicted results of central planning by central banks. They control the economy, not Presidents.

Further,these guys ARE NOT Keynesians. They are Friedmanites. Monetarists. Bernacke is madly applying Friedman's "cure" for the '29 recession, Expansion of "money". To "reflate" asset prices. Exactly Friedman's prescriptions! Liquidity "cures" for an obvious solvency crisis(i.e. more debt to fix too much debt).

Now we will get to experience first hand Mises'(the real one) "continuing monetary/debt expansion until the entire monetary system is destroyed."

A cascade to a world you never thought you'd see could now ensue at literally any moment. Considering the flock of Black Swans overhead, we'll be lucky if just one lands. But one is all we need now.

Purp| 9.17.12 @ 2:46PM

The Federal Reserve did not pass the Recovery Act (the Stimulus) - President Obama and the Democratic Congress passed that act - with 3 Republican Senators help.

The downgrade was from some obscure ratings agency on the Koch Bros. payroll - wonder why?

Ignore me? Or the facts VM?

You've never answered what successful economy, anywhere, has followed Hayek or VM economic theories? Anyone?

axbucxdu| 9.17.12 @ 4:01PM

If you haven't heard, Bob, Bad Bob, purp, whatever your name is, the Austrians are, shall we say, skeptical of theory that any economy should follow. The calculation problem is one notable objection, but there are others.

No, rather they state that one can expect serious malinvestments to occur when political choices distort market signals. Almost a tautology to anyone but statist economists.

From the Watchmen:

Adrian Veidt: "It doesn't take a genius to see that the world has problems."

Edward Blake:" No, but it takes a room full of morons to think they're small enough for you to handle."

Now for the trivia question. Who are you in this dialogue, and who is the Austrian?

Purp| 9.17.12 @ 4:27PM

Your first sentence I can take issue with. From Adam Smith in 1776 on, economic theory has been fundamental to America's economy. It's just that the Hayek's of the world never have had any successful economy follow their theories.

The rest of your statement is gibberish, nonsensical. I am one person, no idea what you are talking about.

axbucxdu| 9.17.12 @ 5:14PM

You do a lousy imitiation of ignorance. Their (Austrian) ideas aren't prescriptive, as for example, the claims made by Keynesians or Monetarists. That's why statists like you are seduced by the latter two camps: turn this knob here, adjust that dial there, and voila! we have economic eden.

The Austrians simply hold out that claims like these will sooner or later depart from reality due to a basic inability to model everything, incomplete information to feed those models, and chaos phenomena, i.e., "black swans." Therefore, do the least harm: minimize political economic and politicized monetary influence on an economy.

It's not surprising then that the prog mindset (like Adrian Veidt's - self proclaimed "smartest man in the world") doesn't find much use for Austrian ideas. They're really economic philosophy after all, not theory. At least they admit it, unlike their competition.

So who are you most like ? Adrian Veidt or Edward Blake?

Purp| 9.17.12 @ 6:14PM

The trouble with your argument is that the "turn the knob" or "adjust the dial" works and has worked in the past - as opposed to the theoretical "free market system" .. also known as Laissez-faire. It doesn't exist, it's never existed and it will never exist.

As soon as you set up any kind of system, some people try to game the system, be it smarter, richer, or more devious types. It is human nature to look for advantage. Heck it's in our genes to find a leg up!

Every time this country has come close to that "free market" ideal, a Depression has resulted.

"Power corrupts and Absolute Power corrupts Absolutely"!

It is true in economic power as well as political power. Without regulatory constraints - "Power corrupts and Absolute Power corrupts Absolutely"!

axbucxdu| 9.17.12 @ 8:23PM

You've just reinforced the Austrian argument. Who regulates the regulators? They've never been elected to the offices and to the power they hold. Absolute power, etc especially applies to them.

Yet somehow the statist rarely considers government corruption, its abuse of power, and economic clumsiness as serious a problem as the turmoil caused by a private interest. Thanks for demonstrating the fatal conceit.

axbucxdu| 9.17.12 @ 8:32PM

It's ideological, and not "scientific" to believe that $220T in unfunded liabilities is a successful example of government economic knob turning. Pitiful.

Who Knows?| 9.17.12 @ 10:14AM

Another excellent synopsis of the current Obama-led morass.

I’ve always marveled that FDR got reelected THREE times, as the economy went to hell. Well, perhaps we’re going to get to choose to do much the same kind of stupid thing, and give Obama four more years to further ruin America.

As for the complete delusion of Obama and his acolytes, nothing could better illustrate his utter lack of imagination, AND lack of love of America, than his reaction to the ambassador’s horrendous death.

You see, if his killers could have had their druthers, it is OBAMA they’d have killed, raped, and drug through the streets, in ecstasy.

In Obama’s mind, he thinks he’s THEIR leader, and that he’s helping birth the New Realization of America, which is ONE with Muslims.

Same same with Hillary, and ALL the people in their bunker mentality. Yes, Obama et al don’t even know it--- that’s for sure---but they are living out much the same kind of ending as Hitler and his faithful: I write metaphorically.

Who’d have ever believed America could go from a White House denigrated by Carter, restored by Reagan, held by Bush I, besmirched by Clinton, re-dignified by Bush II, only to be turned into the hellhole that’s bringing on deluded self-annihilation by the usurper, Obama?

Here comes our nineteenth nervous breakdown.

Who Knows?| 9.17.12 @ 10:15AM

People forget that things can always get worse, and, indeed, if one is clear-minded, and can read accounting records, the future is pretty much guaranteed. We’re putting off the final reckoning, in the classic way---borrow long and lend short.

In other words, there’s a whole lot of pretending going on, as we use a cash flow accounting system, whereas a realistic double entry system that shows BOTH assets and liabilities, indicates there’s ALREADY a whole lot of bankrupt entities out there.

America---the zombie nation.

JP| 9.17.12 @ 10:42AM

The voters seem to want more of the same. I fear they will get it come election day. The years 2013 and 2014 will hit every American like a ton of bricks. And then they will demand to know who inflicted such misery on them.

Pecos Pete| 9.17.12 @ 12:09PM

Bush did it! Don't you know? /sarc/

Purp| 9.17.12 @ 4:28PM

There you go again - scare, scare, scare ... have you never heard that crying wolf too many times results in being ignored?

Paul Avery| 9.17.12 @ 11:32AM

This article is "journalism" at its worst, full of selective statistics and completely missing any historical context in the writer's zeal to cast blame on a single person or party.

We are experiencing the worst recession since the Great Depression, with job losses approximately 3x the losses from last (2001) recession and where the rest of the world is even in worse shape. People forget that we had a lower than average recovery from the 2001 recession, much of it fueled by an unsustainable housing bubble. This happened even after a major set of tax cuts around 2001 that was supposed to fire up the economy, never mind that the US recorded surpluses in the years leading up to it.

Measuring gas prices from January 2009 is a deliberate lie by omission, because the recovery did not bottom out until later that year and worldwide oil prices were still very low because of low demand (gasoline prices closely track oil prices). Oil prices are now increasing as worldwide demand has picked up.

By focusing attention on a single item (retail food prices) he tries to deflect attention the fact that inflation has been extremely low throughout the recession.

There are other points, but I will stop here. In short, this kind of article is not a sober analysis but a blame-assigning exercise meant to fire up his readership. I expect better.

axbucxdu| 9.17.12 @ 12:17PM

Low inflation, in what is overall a deflationary environment, really deflects attention away from a correspondingly high rate of monetary debasement. The Austrians would say we indeed have a high rate of inflation. What does the Fed's balance sheet look like?

Conservative Bob| 9.17.12 @ 2:32PM

Last week the Fed announced more "Easing" to help O get 4 more years. Friday we were down graded again.

In service of O the Fed reduced the value of every hard asset you own while simultaneously increasing the cost of everything you buy.

Not sure how much yet as it depends on how much actual 'easing' the Fed does, but the market did not go up in real terms so much as adjust for the lower value of our dollar.

This is theft pure and simple, in service of trying to reelect a failing administration.

This is a crime against every single American.

Third Army| 9.17.12 @ 7:50PM

I've run out of patience. My husband has been unemployed now for over 4 years. Our rent went up $200 last month. The gas prices are killing us. I haven't had a raise in two years and my health care premims keep going up. So I make less. No vacations anymore. Why anyone would want more misery by voting for Obama is beyond me.

The American Spectator