Did ANYONE else hear Jim Cramer mention an intent to "win the war on unemployment and foreclosures"?

War on Unemployment?
War on Foreclosures?

I'm guessing that those wars will be just as successful as:

War on Drugs
War on Terror
War on Poverty

I think we should all get ready for a WHOLE LOT MORE Unemployment and Foreclosures for a REALLY LONG TIME. We've just declared war against them.

Imstellar,

As always you misinterpret data to fit your perceptions.

Real GDP growth has doubled from 1970 to 1990 check BEA, national debt has only increased larger then a fraction of total GDP from 1980 to 1990, with massive debt growth from 1990 to 2000. These levels however are still below levels of World War 2.

Your example really however applies when it comes to the recent so called growth from 1997 to 2007, as real wage increases were nonexistent, so was real stock market growth on the S&P 500. So instead of the economy expanding the US economy has been fueling growth with borrowing. At the same time credit card debt started overtake real wages, with massive increases from 2003Q1.
http://www.businessweek.com/the_thread/economicsunbound/archives/2009/02/the_failure_of_1.html

Your idea that private enterprise can solve these issues is again wrong, given that the Progressive movement brought government intervention to sustain fair markets and competition which lead to break ups of monopolies. Bringing forth agencies like the FDA, FTC and the Interstate Commerce Commission. The Federal Reserve was created to control tariffs and antitrust cases. All these agencies came about in the 1900s and were responses to citizen requests after laissez-faire economics in the 1800s, they also paved the way for the roaring 20s. Before you start complaining about the the government extending the great depression a recent study showed that only 20% of professional economists hold that view, and even then they claim that they Fed should have been the one to instigate change by reducing interest rates and allow credit back in the economy but this is in hindsight with development of Monetary policy in the 50s and 60s.

Furthermore, I never advocated for socialism in the US because it is not going to happen, what I said was socialistic policies, the capitalistic component is not being removed from the US unlike what you seem to believe. Its called a Mixed economy for a reason. There is no pure capitalistic or socialistic economy in the world bar Cuba and some failed states, the closest capitalistic state in the world is actually Singapore.

You keep saying '2%' unemployment.

The unemployment problem is far more severe, but you are underestimating its very nature, the stimulus package was created to save or create 3.5 million jobs, the unemployment figures currently place it at 4.4 million (half of this in the last 4 months) since the start of the recession.

With levels spiking to 8.1 as I mentioned earlier in single month, the highest level since 1983. This strikes at consumer confidence, and further reduces consumption and aggregate demand, not to mention that it means that more foreclosures are coming. Consumption is already taking a hit as confidence plummets and expenditure is being relegated to essentials (however I think the electronics sector will still thrive, especially the video games market, it has been shown to be fairly recession proof unless EA goes crazy and starts to buy up other companies).

Not only are layoffs large but there is increasing firms that are simply coming out of entire market sectors. The Labor department has stated that Unemployment benefits will not recover lost jobs but more must be spent on actual job retraining to realign the US economy with trend factors over the last 10 years, 4.5 billion is in the stimulus package for job retraining. That is still too low as in current dollars $20 billion a year went to job training in 1979, compared with only $6 billion last year.

This recession will fundamentally rebuild the economy, even with unemployment benefits and a sudden resurgence in consumer confidence there is not enough credit available to allow a short term return to employment. Which again necessitates the large fiscal policies we are seeing enacted.

Education will also play a vital role in this, am an advocate of centralized educational standards. I disagree with educational avenues in the US, which usually require graduates to graduate with massive debt which they repay for several years afterward. Not to mention that systems like the SAT and No Child Left behind have only created a system where children learn more about test taking then actual acquisition of knowledge. But this is another debate entirely which I don't really feel like expanding on right now.

Finally. Again to reiterate what I said about the 'let them fail' ideas with regards to the banking system. The Treasury still has not made up its mind how it will cover the toxic debt, the Fed let Lehman Brothers fail and see what happened, the entire finical sector melted down and dragged several other big firms with it. There is talk of letting Citigroup fail, that is a huge bank, and the actual cross exposure is not clearly relevant if its allowed to fail. It could drag the rest of the financial sector with it. However there is clear rallying right now as Citigroup posted a profit, with markets perking up.

This looks like a follow-up story to the one they did on Foreclosure Alley.

http://www.videosift.com/video/Foreclosure-Alley

Tags for this video have been changed from 'Housing, Foreclosures, econemy' to 'Housing, Foreclosures, economy' - edited by ant

My old hometown. At least in Robocop they had the nice areas, and a Robocop.

I can also imagine the number of burnt out homes rising along with the foreclosures.

Now that I look at it again, this video leaves out not only the credit default swaps, but the flippers AND the builders who overbuilt areas, like in Merced County, CA, where I grew up, and which is now the epicenter of foreclosures and defaults. All these houses were built for the SF Bay Area market--two hours away by car--and the county, and others like it, were just saturated with homes, I mean, INFESTED with new developments. When my mother died in October, 2004, I put her 50yr old house on the market immediately and sold it within two weeks. This was a 1200 sq ft. house originally purchased for $16,000 in 1971 that was now "worth" $225,000. I got my check in Dec. and the market peaked in Jan. 2005. Now no one in that county can sell their home for anywhere near what it is "worth" because the market has completely collapsed.

>> ^jwray:
Why not privatize the fire department while you're at it?

Garrison Keillor talks bout such a thing in the suburbs of St. Paul, Minnesota in his book, Homegrown Democrat. In it he talks about the response time for the private emergency services in the suburbs compared to that of the public ones within the city limits. The private companys sometimes take upwards of 20 minutes to respond, while the public ones are there within 4 minutes on average.

And the thing we have to remember, privatized services like security, fire, and emergency medical, provide the service prior to ever discussing pricing then charge you afterwards.

>> ^imstellar28:
1. the fire department functions in the same role as the police department: to protect against the destruction of private property and loss of life. you cannot compare the police force or fire department to a school. if i burn down your house, i am committing a criminal act. if i don't teach your son algebra, i am not doing anything wrong. it is an invalid comparison because one enforces law, while the other merely provides a service.

I think you've got your analogy mixed up there. Committing arson is quite a bit different than not teaching a child. Though, if we were to correct your analogy, and say that if you were to let someones house burn to the ground instead of doing your job as a firefighter to attempt to put it out, then you would be subject to the same punishment, that of being terminated from your job, as you would should you as a math teacher refuse to do your job.
>> ^imstellar28:
2. so if i find a cure to cancer, i'm guessing you are going to force me to sell it to you? by your logic, if i didn't sell it to you i would be using "coercion" if you were dying from cancer. inaction is not, and cannot be, a method of coercion unless you initially set into motion the cause of distress--at which point, it cannot be considered inaction.

How did you find your cure for cancer? Do you work for a medical research company Did you fund all your research privately or receive government subsidies? Did you alone do all the research, or did you base your research on the work of others? Did they receive and government funding? Do you have a degree? Was your education paid for with loans? Are you simply a greedy asshole? All questions that would need to answered in order to determine the ownership of your cure. Some people finding such a cure would be content to give it to the world.
>> ^imstellar28:
3. healthcare is a service. healthcare providers have to go to school to develop their skills. you don't have a right to healthcare if nobody is willing to sell it to you. it is a man-made product which means a man has to choose to share it. you don't walk into a supermarket and demand that you have a right to free (or cheap) food because you need it to survive, so why do you think its okay to walk into a clinic and demand free (or cheap) healthcare?

Do you know that the vast majority of doctors get their degrees through the used of federally funded loans, scholarships, and grants? Which is then reimbursed by the money they receive from their patients. Now if they are able to have their education paid for by tax payers and their patients, why isn't it fair to expect them to work as a service to their community? No one is saying they shouldn't receive compensation, but rather that their compensation far outweighs their investment.
>> ^imstellar28:
4. if a firefighter (legally contracted by the government or otherwise) fails to put out your house fire, that is a breech of contract (fraud) not coercion. if in uncontracted firefighter walks by, he has every right to charge you a million dollars or let your house burn to the ground. if you could force others to work for you, you would be a slaveowner.

Again, like your "cancer cure" argument, you're assuming that a person would only do something for monetary gain, firefighters don't eat smoke because they get paid well, many small communities only have volunteer fire departments, a firefighter walking by would do what they could to help, regardless of their reward. Now let's look at your "slaveowner" statement, if I own a business and employ a dozen people, in a job market where if any one of them were to lose their job it could be months before they are rehired, and I know that none of them can afford to live without the income they receive from me. I as their employer can insist they do what ever I choose, be it mow my lawn, wash my car, or empty my septic tank, certain in knowing that although they have the option to tell me to fuck off, they won't because they can't risk losing their job. I, in essence, am then able to force them to do my bidding, yet I am not technically a slave owner. We are all slaves so long as we cannot change jobs at will.

>> ^imstellar28:
5. free markets don't reward "cranks, liars, or frauds" they punish them with bankruptcy. that is, unless you attempt to intervene with a "bailout" or other regulation which keeps them in business. consumers don't lobby for regulation, corporations do because competition is not good for business, pure and simple. people don't buy products which aren't useful, and people are free to buy whatever products they chose, as are they free to seek legal compensation for fraudulent claims.

I beg to differ, free markets do what they can to discourage educated consumption, thereby rewarding those who can make sales through any and all means, including lies, and fraud. More over, a depressed economy encourages this behavior, advertising get rich quick scams, that only make the person selling the scam rich. Regulation is designed to prevent unfair business practices, such as oil speculation by people who own oil commodities that results in unrealistically inflated prices, or mortgage lenders offering mortgages at an affordable rate then jacking the interest up in order to force unreasonable payments or foreclosures. When you have massive corporate juggernauts like we have now, with a constant influx of advertising, and a culture based on ignorant consumerism, competition is an illusion, and the free market is a myth.

>> ^imstellar28:
6. central government is inherently more inefficient than local organization. the more hands you have to pass information through, the more confusing and costly it becomes. there is no escaping that. a third party who has never met you will never better understand your needs, especially when they are not compensated based on how well they serve you. a government official does not know what is best for your family, nor do they know the best way to achieve it--only you do.

Bureaucracy is present no matter if it be governmental or corporate. It's going to be inefficient regardless, nothing is dealt with on a local level. If you have surgery, your claim will go over the desk of a dozen people at your insurance company just as it would a federal agency. The difference, the insurance company is working for profit, they will do everything they can to deny your claim/service, where as the most a government agency might do would be delay your service.

Too many people in this country have been led to believe that centralized government is bad, that socialized services are bad, that the free market can solve everything. Well take a good look around, millions out of work, millions without health care, millions of families losing their homes due to predatory lenders, and an economy on the verge of becoming the next great depression.

And what do we have to thank for this? A history of corporate greed, government collusion, and a populace too stupid to realize they've been used.

Joe was busy dealing with the foreclosure of his home. Tough break, McCain. Pizza Pockets!

I know, it may make no sense. That is because I am not a true religious values voter. Thus, I have absolutely no morality and I am ultimately destined for Hell(tm). At this juncture it is pointless for me to refrain from making fun of religion. If I stop now, I am still going to Hell(tm)

If I am to suffer an eternity being tortured by the big cloven hoofed red-guy(tm) with horns and a pitch fork, I might as well go out in an intense blaze fueled by fiery brimstone, dragged tooth an nail by Beelzebub and his Quasit army into the depths of the nine hells. I suspect the Leprechauns living in the upper levels of the underworld just below my tulip patch will laugh... teary eyed... at me, as I swoop past them when the Earth opens to claim it's luscious, juicy prize.

After the first decade, both the tortured soul and the demons must become rather bored. Rather repetitive it must be to torture the same person over and over and over again. After a while it just becomes monotonous and not unlike working for the Department of Public Works. Nowhere as exciting as teaching 'Exorcism 101' at the Vatican, or 'How To Maintain 21 Virgins And Have Sex With Them Too' as taught at so many Madrassa around the Middle East.

I suspect Hell must be quite a heavily populated place. Especially with the Earth's population increasing to FAR beyond what it was 6000 years ago. A full 6.6 billion strong! Though as the entire universe is only 6000 years old, they most certainly must have planned ahead to reserve plenty of real estate. They will be fine I am certain. Considering the Earth's diameter is quite a large 12,756.1 km. As a result, we can further calculate the Earth's Volume, which is 1,097,509,500,000,000,000,000 cubic meters. Taking that into account we have PLENTY of fire and brimstone for ALL! Plenty of room in Hell(tm) I say! At least I won't be in cramped quarters. Plenty of room for a few US military bases, and a Pentecostal Church. Demons just LOVE speaking in tongues. Being forked and all, they are quite adept at the language.

Peace.


>> ^MarineGunrock:
No, I say it because just about every one of your comments has something to do with insulting Christians - even on videos that have nothing to do with religion.
In reply to this comment by honkeytonk73:
>> ^MarineGunrock:
You really are a hateful sumbitch.
In reply to this comment by honkeytonk73:
Voter disenfranchising in the name of JEEEESUS. All for the sake of maintaining 'values voter' superiority. Christian morality at it's finest I say.


I probably should not have singled out values voters as being solely Christian. I apologize as that is wholly not fair in the least. Though those not able to speak to invisible magical friends simply have no values, so apparently they cannot be taken into consideration.
I wouldn't call myself hateful (others may and have the right to do so). Rather, I consider myself to be equally unbound by any form of deistic superstition among the hundreds which currently exist and the greater number which has existed in the past.
To elaborate, for those who have interest:
Each superstition in their own right is -entirely- correct in that they are the 'one' true faith. Everyone is correct, as it makes perfect sense. It is also politically correct to roll over and agree that everyone is equally deluded. Life is simpler that way is it not?
So now... I will now go bathe in the Lake of Fire(tm) for my sins, wherever that may be. I'll be sure to let everyone know if fire can exist in a liquid form... though I highly suspect it will be a lake of superheated plasma, rather than fire. In that case, I suspect the environment in hell is of quite high pressure.
The typical maximum pressure at which the human body can maintain life is measurable scientifically. On the other hand.. the non-corporeal 'spirit' with zero nerve endings, could potentially withstand infinite pressure. But then what would be the point? With no nerves, can one have pain? So what is the purpose of torture then? Maybe the big red horned guys just insult the damned denizens over and over again... and that is how they torture.
These are such insults I suspect I will endure in the various supposed afterlives:
"No your mother is NOT Aphrodite, I said a HERMAPHRODITE you nincompoop!"
"Your hair is as big as Tammy Fae Bakker and your eyelashes help you fly!"
"You smell like an all too lonely Arabian goat herder!"
"Your mother was a priestess of Lesbos!"
"Your real father was Pan, your momma got rammed darn good eh Mr coven hooves?"
I shall update everyone from Hell(tm) when I arrive. I hope they have broadband. Watch, one torture is to only provide a 300 baud inernet connection. Upper case text only. TRS-80 COCO!!

>> ^NordlichReiter:
>> ^honkeytonk73:
Voter disenfranchising in the name of JEEEESUS. All for the sake of maintaining 'values voter' superiority. Christian morality at it's finest I say.

Tell us how you really feel, that Women and minorities shouldn't be able to vote. The key word in your comment is superiority what makes you superior? Now I don't no if that was satire or not, but I'm gonna have to give you a big Fuck You.


Such language!

He must not be a values voter.

>> ^rougy:
How many people who have had their homes forclosed will remember to change their voter registration?
This is just low as low gets and making excuses for it is unforgivable.


If you don't follow the rules don't expect to have them follow you back. This isn't a partisan argument at all, it is one of how to conduct something of this scale without massive fraud. With all this ACORN stuff happening lately, I don't see how people even have a problem with this.

How else can one assure that the person voting that day is indeed themselves except with very specific information like this, seriously. If you didn't follow procedure on changing your address on your eclectic bill when you moved, don't expect electricity either.

>> ^honkeytonk73:
Voter disenfranchising in the name of JEEEESUS. All for the sake of maintaining 'values voter' superiority. Christian morality at it's finest I say.


Tell us how you really feel, that Women and minorities shouldn't be able to vote. The key word in your comment is superiority what makes you superior? Now I don't no if that was satire or not, but I'm gonna have to give you a big Fuck You.

Work is for suckers. Quit, then sift full time. You can probably do it for two solid months before your house goes into foreclosure. Food for thought.

Stop in whenever you can, buddy.

In reply to this comment by Bleedingsnowman:
Yeah, with my new job and location I've sort of become more of a lurker. I appreciate the support, though, and good to hear from you.

In reply to this comment by kronosposeidon:
It's good to see you back, Mr. Snowman! Don't go disappearing on us again.

In reply to this comment by NetRunner:

What does the Austrian school of thought have to say about what to do in response to the current problems?

The Austrians do have a proposal, an extremely elaborate and complex one--the only difference is it is subtle in execution and there is no prime mover. It is a solution which involves millions of people--rather than a mere dozen.

The Austrians do not wish to do nothing, by any means, there is much to do to cure the economy. We can discuss the underlying economic principles in another post, but here are some items which would be a good start:

1. The government must aggressively investigate and prosecute all instances of fraud--putting those responsible in jail and levying extremely stiff personal fines.

2. The government should immediately issue a public statement stating that there will be no bailouts or financial aid to companies who failed to properly manage risk. Companies with responsible executives and solid business practices will not be punished, nor will taxpayers. Historically, a large contributor to market volatility has been speculation on impending regulation. This statement will severely calm the market--which is currently rocketing up and down on a daily basis amid speculation on the extent of government intervention.

3. The government is to immediately cease all monetary infusion in order to curb inflation. Inflation significantly retards actual growth. In a healthy economy, economic growth is perfectly matched with monetary growth. As it stands, economic growth is very far behind. Doing this will raise the value of the dollar and increase the real value of savings and lower the prices of goods.

4. A modest reduction in government spending should be followed by an equally sized tax cut. Tax cuts in the 1920s stimulated economic growth, helping to prevent a serious recession. This will create a larger supply of consumer savings available for investment, while also providing incentives for banks to lend.

5. Legislation encouraging mortgages with small or nonexistent downpayments must be repealed. Economists should issue a public statement encouraging lenders and lendees return to the de-facto standard of 20% down on a house. This protects the homeowner from foreclosure by providing a store of value to guard against market fluctuations.

6. Interest rates and housing prices must face a market correction. The artificially low interest rates from 2001-2004 must be allowed to rise in order for loans to become profitable again, and housing prices must be allowed to drop to pre-bubble levels. The result will be both affordable housing for consumers, and low-risk loans for bankers.

7. Market action must be permitted to allow banks to liquidate bad assets, even at a loss. This cash flow will enable banks to rebuild. Those banks which improperly diversified and are unable to rebuild must be allowed to fragment and be sold off to the highest bidder. This will enable responsible, ethical banks to gain larger market share and provide a larger pool of customers with higher-quality, safer loans.

8. Government officials should publicly de-emphasize the politically charged statistic of home ownership, and encourage homeowners to seek to live in their means by pursuing all housing options available.

9. Communities should come together to help support people affected by the housing crisis. Families and friends should offer temporary housing or modest monetary relief to help get people back on their feet--perhaps in exchange for help renovating the house, or other services.

Ron Paul is absolutely clueless about what the failure of this bill means to middle America.

Do you really think this is a bailout of Wall Street? No, this is a bailout of all the citizen debtors who never had the ability to pay their mortgages in the first place. By transferring these bad mortgages to the govt, these homeowners are getting a reprieve from foreclosure.

You can be sure the U.S. govt is a much more lenient lender than these banks ever will be.

America, what are you doing???