While Repubs Argue About Economy, Statistics PROVE Obama has ADDED Jobs and Improved Stock Market

Just look at the Jobs Report. Bush LOST jobs and Obama has remarkably improved jobs since the Republicand Devastation!

Just look at the Stock Market! It goes up under Democrats and drastically DOWN under Republicans! No one can deny the FACTS!

Tea Party - Where Are You? GOP Secretly Out to Stop Wall Street Reform and Raise Gas Prices and Wreck Our Economy Again!

The GOP is at it again. Republicans on the House Agriculture Committee passed a plan Wednesday to delay regulation on "financial speculation", including in the food and OIL MARKETS. In a Wednesday vote, the committee approved a bill to delay by 18 months the writing of many key regulations outlined in last year’s Dodd-Frank financial reform law. Dodd-Frank requires regulators to write a host of new rules to TIGHTEN OVERSIGHT over DERIVATIVES, financial instruments designed to help farmers and manufacturers hedge their risk that are also used by financial speculators. Warren Buffett has called derivatives "Financial Weapons of Mass Destruction" and the financial tools played a key role in the downfall of insurance giant AIG. THIS CAUSES GAS PRICES TO GO UP! Republicans kept quiet and refused to comment to reporters -- afraid to be linked to Rising Gas Prices!

AND

Wall Street's King: Goldman Sachs is pulling out all the stops (spending millions on lobbyists; wining and dining Congress) in their desperate attempt to stop or at least delay the Volcker Rule. This is the BIG ONE Baby! The Volcker Plan is a proposal to restrict U.S. banks from making certain kinds of speculative investments if they are not on behalf of their customers. THIS IS THE BIG WALL STREET REFORM PLAN. This plan STOPS the Banks from betting against the American Public. If you are familiar with the Housing Bubble burst, as the Goldman Sachs investigation showed, business as usual on Wall Street has for too long allowed banks to create instruments which are based on junky assets, then sell them to clients, and bet against their own clients by betting on their failure. The Volcker Plan proposes to end that type of conflict which Wall Street has engaged in.

Now, lobbying disclosures show Goldman representatives have been working both sides of the political aisle (Both Repubs & Dems are being lobbied and are commiserate in delaying this legislation) and meeting with top officials in the White House and regulatory agencies. Get this, Goldman Sachs is lobbying the very agencies that are supposed to be regulating them and protecting "We the People."

Goldman has hired an all-star team of lobbyists and former government officials, leveraging powerful connections to get its message across to regulatory and political leaders."Before the crisis, Goldman was basically non-existent in Washington," said a former Congressional staffer who now works as a policy analyst at a Wall Street bank. "Post-crisis, Goldman is everywhere."

The SEC and four other regulators are in the process of writing separate versions of the Volcker rule, which must then be reconciled and shaped into a single set of regulations.

"Volcker is the subject of a very quiet, closed-door battle right now, not just between us and Wall Street, but among the agencies as well," said Bart Naylor, who has lobbied regulators for consumer-rights coalition Americans for Financial Reform.
Goldman Sachs spokesman Stephen Cohen declined to comment.

My question is, why aren't the Tea Partiers aware of this? Why aren't they protesting Goldman Sachs and their lobbyists? I thought they were interested in improving the economy. Why isn't this all over Cable News? Not on Fox! Not on NBC, ABC, CBS! Very little on-line.

Why aren't we all up in arms about this? I'm Blogging about it.
Tea Party, if you truly care about the Economy and a successful America, then Read Up on this Issue. Call your Congresspeople to support this legislation! However you will be very disappointed. The biggest opposition to this legislation are your friends, the GOP! (And some Dems too!) I guess they all have deep pockets!

States Kicking Granny to the Curb!

CNN Reports: States Kicking Granny to the Curb! For the elderly, state budget cuts could mean no more daily hot meals and exercise classes to help prevent falls. At worst, some could even lose their beds at the nursing home. These and other lifelines for seniors may disappear as governors and lawmakers slash spending to close an estimated $112 billion in budget shortfalls, advocates say. Many state officials say they don't want to reduce senior services, but they have little choice due to massive deficits. But it's not all bad news. The funding for one senior program in Georgia was restored after legislators agreed the service was too important to cut.

Here's a look at what's at risk for many of the nation's elderly.
Shuttering nursing homes
Among the most dramatic of the proposed cuts is the severe reduction in Medicaid reimbursement rates to nursing homes in Texas. Facing a shortfall of up to $27 billion, state lawmakers want to reduce the rate by 10%. But payments to nursing homes would plummet by a total of 34% because they would also lose federal matching funds.

Happy 65th birthday, boomers. Now what?
This could result in the shuttering of 850 of the state's 1,000 nursing homes, forcing up to 45,000 elderly residents to find other accommodations, said David Thomason, chair of the Texas Senior Advocacy Coalition. Texas nursing homes already lose money on Medicaid patients so they could not absorb another reduction, facility operators say. If rates were cut further, many would be forced to stop participating in the Medicaid program and would need to either close the buildings or convert them to other health-related uses.
As it is, Sears Methodist Retirement System in Austin has to solicit donations and charge private patients more to make up the $4 million loss it suffers on its Medicaid residents, said Keith Perry, who heads the non-profit. If the cuts go through, Sears Methodist would have to stop caring for its roughly 400 Medicaid patients, whose average age is 84. "There's no way we could staff those facilities at those reimbursement rates," Perry said. This scenario is terrifying Carol Poor, whose 83-year-old mother lives in an Alzheimer's unit at Christian Care Centers in Gunter, a town north of Dallas. If her mother were discharged, Poor said she would have to retire early from her secretarial job to care for her mother since neither can afford to pay for a nurse or nursing home. "My mother worked and paid taxes all these years," said Poor. "She deserves someone to be there for her." Texas lawmakers did not return calls seeking comment.

Losing their center
On a recent Wednesday in March, dozens of elderly New Yorkers gathered at the Clinton Senior Center in midtown Manhattan for an hour-long yoga class, followed by a hot lunch of pork chops, potatoes, and carrots.
But they soon may have to fend for themselves if New York State does not restore $27 million in funding for New York City's senior centers. Without this money, Mayor Michael Bloomberg has said he'll have to close 105 of the city's 256 centers. Clinton would be one of them.
The center's services are critical to keeping these low-income senior citizens living at home, said David Gillcrist, executive director of Project Find, which runs Clinton. They receive a nutritious meal and take classes that improve their balance, strength and confidence. Equally as important, they are able to socialize with friends and not become isolated and depressed. All these services help keep the seniors out of hospitals and nursing homes, which would ultimately cost the city a lot more than the $367,000 it provides to Clinton, Gillcrist said. "It makes no sense to gut one-third of the support network that lets senior citizens age independently," he said.
The city's Department of Aging is trying to blunt the impact of the cuts by maintaining as many services as possible, said a Bloomberg spokesman. But the city, which is facing a $4.6 billion shortfall, cannot make up for the elimination of the state funds. A spokesman for Gov. Andrew Cuomo did not return an email seeking comment.

America's Economy: Within 5 years we will have a Severe Worker Shortage!

Paul Krugman and Michael Moore have written excellent articles about the state of our country's current economy. Both articles cite the need for more jobs residing IN America (vs off-shoring) and suggest Unions are vitally needed to give the working middle class a voice and strength through collective bargaining. Otherwise, greedy Big Business will continue to drive down wages and benefits and continue to outsource jobs offshore. Krugman also said technology lessens the need for advanced degrees in certain areas (eg: the growing use of software to conduct legal research vs armies of lawyers and paralegals conducting this research). Instead, study of the future labor needs in our country suggests an increasing need for service and manual labor type jobs.

I decided to test out Krugman's and Moore's theories re: future labor needs. First, I studied the current US Census Bureau statistics. I studied the rate of population, by AGE, between the years 2000 to 2008. Then, based on these numbers, projected the population, by AGE, over the next 20 years, through to 2028. What the data tells me is, over the next 20 years, the rate of Baby Boomers in retirement age is going to double the current rate. The working population, those between 20 and 50, will need to increase in order to meet the needs of the Boomers. Boomers are going to need plenty of "IN America" - service workers to assist them through their Golden Years. These are jobs that CANNOT be outsourced offshore.

America's Future Job Needs include:

. Medical: Doctors, Nurses, Hospital Workers, Home Healthcare and Hospice workers

. Assistance: Drivers, Delivery (Food, Products), Maid Service, Lawncare, Home Protection-Electronics, Monitoring

. Entertainment: Home; Electronics, Vacation/Hotel

. End of Life Planning: Nursing Homes vs In-Home Care Decisions; Funeral Planning (Caskets; Funeral Homes; Cemeteries; Groundskeepers; Cremation)

. Financial: Investments; Annuity, Insurance, Retirement Planning and Account Assistance.

. Service: Call Center Support for Healthcare, Medicare, Social Security, Life Planning, Financial, Nursing.

Other than Doctors and Nurses, many of these jobs DO NOT require advanced degrees, however they do require on-site, manual labor. Most of these are jobs CANNOT be out-sourced and MUST remain here, in America.

If I were President Obama, I would focus on Jobs that America needs in the future. He should have weekly or monthly chats with us to explain the changing demographics and our country's future needs. As the Boomers continue to age and approach social security, we are going to need MORE workers in America, NOT Less. Between 2018 and 2028, we will be facing a severe worker shortage soon. The shortage will be particularly in young, strong workers required for the Home Healthcare industry.

What we should be doing is focusing on how to build the rate of YOUNG, strong workers in our workforce, here in America. As we build this new workforce, more taxes will be paid and more money will be put back into the economy. Young entrepreneurs should be thinking about how to best meet the needs of America in our near future.

Guest Voz - Robert Reich: The Real News on Jobs

Republicans and the TeaParty continue to tell us the Middle Class is responsible for our Economic Crisis. They say Unions must be demolished. They say Teachers, FireFighters and Police should continue to take salary & benefit cuts and their pensions eradicated.
While President Obama's Jobs Bill has enabled an increase in jobs, the middle class continues to lose Salary and Benefits. Economist Robert Reich explains the REAL NEWS on Jobs!
Guest Voz -- Robert Reich: "The REAL NEWS on Jobs!"
Are we making progress on the jobs front? The Bureau of Labor Statistics reports 192,000 new jobs in February (220,000 new jobs in the private sector and a drop in government employment), and a drop in the overall unemployment rate from 9 to 8.9 percent. We're heading in the right direction but far too slowly to make a real dent in unemployment. To get the unemployment rate down to 6 percent by 2014 we'd need over 300,000 new jobs a month, every month, between now and then.

Overall, the number of unemployed Americans -- 13.7 million -- is about the same as it was last month. The number working part time who'd rather be working full time -- 8.3 million -- is also about the same. But to get to the most important trend you have to dig under the job numbers and look at what kind of new jobs are being created. That's where the big problem lies.

The National Employment Law Project did just that. Its new data brief shows that most of the new jobs created since February 2010 (about 1.26 million) pay significantly lower wages than the jobs lost (8.4 million) between January 2008 and February 2010. While the biggest losses were higher-wage jobs paying an average of $19.05 to $31.40 an hour, the biggest gains have been lower-wage jobs paying an average of $9.03 to $12.91 an hour. In other words, the big news isn't jobs. It's wages.

For several years now, conservative economists have blamed high unemployment on the purported fact that many Americans have priced themselves out of the global/high-tech jobs market. So if we want more jobs, they say, we'll need to take pay and benefit cuts. And that's exactly what Americans have been doing. Employers have demanded wage and benefit concessions from their unionized workers and often got them. Detroit is creating auto jobs again -- but new hires are getting about half the pay that auto workers were getting before. Airline workers are taking home 30 to 50 percent less than they did years ago. And so on.

Conservatives say it's not enough. That's why unions have to be busted -- and why some governors are seeking to abolish laws requiring workers to become dues-paying union members in order to get certain jobs. Hence, the fights brewing in the Midwest.
Meanwhile, millions of non-union workers have accepted cuts in pay and benefits just to keep their jobs. Health benefits have been slashed, pension contributions from employers dramatically cut, wages dropped or "frozen."

Millions of private-sector workers have been fired and then re-hired as contract workers to do almost exactly what they were doing before, but without any benefits or job security. The current attack on public-sector workers should be seen in this light. The charge is they now take home more generous pay and benefit packages than private-sector workers. It's not true on the wage side if you control for level of education, but it wasn't even true on the benefits side until private-sector benefits fell off a cliff. Meanwhile, across America, public-sector workers have been "furloughed," which is a nice word for not collecting any pay for weeks at a time. At this rate, the unemployment rate will continue to decline. But so will the pay and benefits of most Americans.
Conservative (Republican) economists have it wrong. The underlying problem isn't that so many Americans have priced themselves out of the global/high-tech labor market. It's that they're getting a smaller and smaller share of the pie.

Guest Voz - Robert Reich: The Big Economic Story, and Why Obama Isn't Telling It

These are the two competing stories Americans are telling one another.
Yes, I know: It's more complicated than this. In reality, the lousy economy is due to insufficient demand -- the result of the nation's almost unprecedented concentration of income at the top. The very rich don't spend as much of their income as the middle. And since the housing bubble burst, the middle class hasn't had the buying power to keep the economy going. That concentration of income, in turn, is due to globalization and technological change -- along with unprecedented campaign contributions and lobbying designed to make the rich even richer and do nothing to help average Americans, insider trading, and political bribery.

So B is the truth.
But A is the story Republicans and right-wingers (& Teapartiers) tell. It's a dangerous story because it deflects attention from the real problem and makes it harder for America to focus on the real solution -- which is more widely shared prosperity. (I get into how we might do this in my new book, Aftershock.)

A is also the story President Obama is telling, indirectly, through his deficit commission, his freeze on federal pay, his freeze on discretionary spending, and his wavering on extending the Bush tax cuts for the rich.
Most other Washington Democrats are falling into the same trap.

If Obama and the Democrats were serious about story A they'd at least mention it. They'd tell the nation that income and wealth haven't been this concentrated at the top since 1928, the year before the Great Crash. They'd be indignant about the secret money funneled into midterm campaigns. They'd demand Congress pass the Disclose Act so the public would know where the money comes from.

They'd introduce legislation to curb Wall Street bonuses -- exactly what European leaders are doing with their financial firms. They'd demand that the big banks, now profitable after taxpayer bailouts, reorganize the mortgage debt of distressed homeowners. They'd call for a new WPA to put the unemployed back to work, and pay for it with a tax surcharge on incomes over $1 million.

They'd insist on extended unemployment benefits for log-term jobless who are now exhausting their benefits. And they'd hang tough on the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy -- daring Republicans to vote against extending the cuts for everyone else.

But Obama is doing none of this. Instead, he's telling story A.
Making a big deal out of the deficit -- appointing a deficit commission and letting them grandstand with a plan to cut $4 trillion out of the projected deficit over the next ten years -- $3 of government spending for every $1 of tax increase -- is telling story A.

What the public hears is that our economic problems stem from too much government and that if we reduce government spending we'll be fine.
Announcing a two-year freeze on federal salaries - explaining that "I did not reach this decision easily... these are people's lives" -- is also telling story A.

What the public hears is government bureaucrats are being paid too much, and that if we get the federal payroll under control we'll all be better off.
Proposing a freeze on discretionary (non-defense) spending is telling story A. So is signaling a willingness to extend the Bush tax cuts to the top. So is appointing his top economic advisor from Wall Street (as apparently he's about to do).

In fact, the unwillingness of the President and Washington Democrats to tell story B itself promotes story A, because in the absence of an alternative narrative the Republican story is the only one the public hears.
Obama's advisors explain that the president's moves are designed to "preempt" the resurgent Republicans -- just like Bill Clinton preempted the Gingrich crowd by announcing "the era of big government is over" and then tacking right.

They're wrong. By telling story A and burying story B, the president legitimizes everything the right has been saying. He doesn't preempt them; he fuels them. He gives them more grounds for voting against raising the debt ceiling in a few weeks. He strengthens their argument against additional spending for extended unemployment benefits. He legitimizes their argument against additional stimulus spending.
Bill Clinton had a rapidly expanding economy to fall back on, so his appeasement of Republicans didn't legitimize the Republican world view. Obama doesn't have that luxury. The American public is still hurting and they want to know why.

Unless the President and Democrats explain why the economy still stinks for most Americans and offer a plan to fix it, the Republican explanation and solution -- it's big government's fault, and all we need do is shrink it -- will prevail.
That will mean more hardship for tens of millions of Americans. It will make it harder to remedy the bad economy. And it will set Republicans up for bigger wins in the future.

American Conversation - Part 1: Economy, Jobs, Drugs, Education

True Story: I had lunch with a couple of old insurance agent acquaintances of mine yesterday. I generally don't talk about politics, immigration or religion with acquaintances, but since they were so concerned about the economy, I decided to make an exception.

They were both long time insurance agents, selling Life, Health and Property & Casualty insurance. They both had their own agencies making very comfortable livings until the economy dropped through the floor a couple of years ago. Their agencies went bankrupt. Now they are struggling to find some sort of income. They never thought they would be in this dire financial situation in their sixties.

A couple of weeks ago, they both found jobs at a call center to sell Health insurance to senior citizens. In good economic times, these gentlemen would never have taken a job in a call center. However, these are very dire, economic times. Even so, they still dress very professionally, in business suits and ties and are very grateful to be employed. (They reminded me of my Dad when he found a job trucking up Latino employees to Michigan to pick crops during the Depression. These guys are heroes!)

I decided to share this conversation with my readers on my blog. In the spirit of anonymity, I'm showing their names as: Independent Stan and TeaParty Jack
After they caught me up on their job status, our conversation went something like this:

Teaparty Jack: I don't think the government has a clue about what is happening to the middle class in this economy. We have a domino effect going on. Unemployment is high. Let me give you an example. The general public is not buying cars. The car dealers aren't selling cars. Therefore people don't need new car insurance so insurance agents are out of work. This economy is KILLING the Middle Class.
Independent Stan: (nods) It certainly looks that way. And there is so much screw up in government departments. Look what's happening with unemployment. They don't know anything about the insurance industry. They don't know anything about takebacks. I've been working for no salary for months and now they are disputing my eligibility for unemployment. I had to take this job to pay the mortgage and feed my family, yet at the same time they said I shouldn't be applying for a call center job considering my previous salary. They said I shouldn't be looking for jobs paying less than $33 an hour.
TeaParty Jack: I don't have any use for any of them..for either party. I think we need to kick them all out of office.
Dee: President Obama is trying to fix the economy but the Republicans are blocking him every step of the way.
Independent Stan: I don't like either side, but you are right about the Republicans.
Dee: Bush sent us off the cliff and we could have been in a deep depression if not for the bailouts and the stimulus programs.
Teaparty Jack: Socialism. We can't let the government control us.
Dee: Control us? Are you talking about regulation? During Bush's regime, they deregulated everything. Now look what's happening with BP and Eggs/Poultry and Beef.
Teaparty Jack: Hah! You can't keep blaming Bush for everything.
Independent Stan: Wait a minute. How long did it take us to get out of the Great Depression? 15 years?
Dee: Yep. That's about right. We didn't' get out 'til about 1945. We need to give them a little time to allow the Stimulus and Jobs programs to work.
Independent Stan: (the older of the two, chuckling to himself) You know these were exactly the same conditions before Hitler came into power.
Dee: Oh yes, I know and he was a great orator too (eyes roll).
Teaparty Jack: I still say Kick the bums out! All of them! Both Sides. Let's get people in there that listen to We The People.
Dee: Oh yeah, kick them all out and then we're stuck with the wacko Tea Party candidates.
Teaparty Jack: Wackos? They're not wackos. Like who?
Dee: Well, Sharron Angle for one. The teaparty candidate in Nevada.
Teaparty Jack: (silence. shrug. almost nod.)
Independent Stan: (Nod, Nod, Nod)
Dee: And what about Christine McConnell in Delaware.
Teaparty Jack: I don't see anything wrong with her.
Independent Stan: Come on! She falsified her educational documents and there were problems with her PAC funds...
Dee: (nod, nod, nod)
Teaparty Jack: (shrug -- giving up)
Dee: I agree. But let's get back to the real issue. We do need a Jobs Program. The problem nobody talks about is outsourcing. Big business is outsourcing the jobs the Middle Incomers want offshore. We need to bring those jobs back to America, at least a percentage of them. And for the companies that do bring them back, give them the tax breaks their begging for. It would cost our country NOTHING.
Independent Stan: (nods) Yeah but do you feel like paying $1500 for a flat screen TV that costs you a hundred and fifty bucks today?
Teaparty Jack: Yeah. That's cuz overseas, they only pay a buck an hour.
Dee: A day....I know, but those are the jobs that Americans want. Look at all the IT companies and Telecoms. They outsource most of their jobs offshore. The other thing, we are not doing a good enough job educating our children.
Independent Stan: Yes. They'd rather sit around and do Meth. Did you see that special the other day?
Dee: (Nod) I see what you are saying. The U.S. is the number one abuser of illegal drugs in the world. Other countries start early with their focus on education. I've heard that many countries in the Middle East, India for example, started focusing on education for their pre-schoolers in the 80's and 90's in preparation for the IT jobs of today. We need that kind of focus for our kids. Education is the great equalizer.
Independent Stan: I know what you mean but we do have freedom of choice. Unfortunately the choice our young people seem to be taking is Meth and other similar drugs. They'd rather sit around, smoke pot, do meth and play video games. They want the old manufacturing jobs, but those jobs have been outsourced overseas and they are never coming back.
Tea Party Jack: We can't let the government run our schools like the do in the Middle East. More Socialism.
Dee, Independent Stan: (shrug, shake head)
Indepent Stan: I bet you believe the President is not an American.
Tea Party Jack: I've never seen his Birth Certificate.
Independent Jack: (laughing) I've seen his Birth Certificate and they had a birth announcement the week after he was born. Come on. They've shown the same kind we all have. And he's not a Muslim anyway. It wouldn't even matter if he was one. Freedom of religion. Remember? That argument is silly.
Tea Party Jack: (Shrugs)
Dee: Drugs. We are the number one abuser of illegal drugs in the world and the cartels are falling all over themselves to supply us. And, on the other hand, we are the number one supplier of Guns to the Drug Cartels.
Tea Party Jack: We need to wall up the border.
Independent Stan: (Nods)
Dee: (head turns sideways) Jack! You do not want to have this conversation with me. (they do not know I have a blog) You will lose this discussion. You cannot tell me you want to build a 2000 mile wall on our Southern Border.
Independent Stan and Tea Party Jack: (both sit up straight, Stan stares at Jack, waiting for his response)
Tea Party Jack: (Backing up a bit) Well, maybe not 2000 miles, but we do have to secure the border. Don't you agree?
Independent Stan: (switching his stare back to me) You do agree to a secure border, don't you Dee?
(See: American Conversation - Part 2: Immigration)

Guest Voz: Immigration Reform would Help Economy

Immigration reform would help economy
Guest Voz: JAY BYERS and MARK ROSENBURY are Iowa Immigration Education Coalition Steering Committee members. Contact: info@iowaimmigrationaeducation.org
With the economic crisis foremost on everyone's mind, it is hardly a surprise that the issue of immigration reform has taken a backseat. While it is imperative that Congress act quickly to address this economic and labor crisis, what might come as a surprise is that immigration reform - seemingly unrelated - may actually be a key facet in invigorating our stagnant economy and creating jobs for Americans.

A recent report by UCLA's Raul Hinojosa-Ojeda calculates the economic effects of the three most often discussed immigration scenarios:
(1) comprehensive immigration reform, including a pathway to legalization;
(2) a temporary worker program, with no pathway to legalization; and
(3) mass deportations coupled with sealing the border.

The study shows:
- comprehensive immigration reform would produce the greatest economic benefits for Americans, finding that: - It would generate an additional $1.5 trillion in U.S. GDP over 10 years. Within three years, it would boost wages for native-born and newly legalized immigrants, increase tax revenues up to $4.5 billion to $5.4 billion and increase consumer spending - enough to support 750,000 to 900,000 new U.S. jobs.
- The temporary worker program is estimated to increase U.S. GDP by $792 billion over 10 years, while decreasing wages for both native-born and newly legalized immigrants.
- Mass deportation would reduce the U.S. GDP an estimated $2.6 trillion over 10 years - providing some increase in wages for less-skilled native workers but reducing wages for higher-skilled natives and causing widespread job loss. This does not account for the cost of deportation, which has been estimated at over $200 billion.

Iowa-specific studies echo these findings. According to the Iowa Policy Project, unauthorized families in Iowa paid between $40 million and $62 million in taxes in 2007 alone. Another study, by the Perryman Group, found that if all undocumented immigrants were removed from Iowa, local economies would lose $1.4 billion in potential revenue, $613.4 million in economic output, and approximately 8,800 jobs. A study by the National Milk Producers Federation confirms the essential role of immigrant labor. A loss of 50 percent of immigrant dairy farm-workers nationally would lower sales annually by $6.7 billion and reduce total economic output by $11.2 billion, while removing all immigrant dairy workers would produce a net loss of nearly 133,000 U.S. jobs.

This validates what numerous other reports have stated in the past year. Organizations ranging from the libertarian Cato Institute, to the widely acclaimed Brookings Institute, to the bipartisan Council on Foreign Relations have all weighed in on the economic ramifications of reform, and all agree - America needs comprehensive immigration reform.
Much of the recent discourse concerning reform has been divisive in nature, and falls out of line with the fact that comprehensive immigration reform has traditionally garnered bipartisan support. Some might even be surprised at the fact that comprehensive immigration reform enjoys vast public support. According to a January 2010 poll by the Benenson Strategy Group, 62 percent of Republican voters and 87 percent of voters overall support an earned path to citizenship for undocumented immigrants. In the coming months, Congress has a chance to make real, positive change for our country. We all agree that our economy needs to be fixed and we all agree that our current immigration policies are broken. Why not make the decision that benefits everyone?

Unemployment Rates vs Salary vs Population - Data Proves Migrant Labor Does NOT significantly Impact High Unemployment Rates!

I am very curious about the unemployment rate in the US. Look at the map. The highest rate of unemployment is:

1. Michigan: 14.6 (Auto Industry)

2. Nevada: 13.0 (Gambling, Tourism)

3. Rhode Island: 12.9 (Fishing; AgJobs)

4. South Carolina: 12.6 (Textile; AgJobs)

5. California: 12.4 (AgJobs; Entertainment; Technology)

6. D.C.: 12.1 (Fed Gov & Professional Jobs)

Population doesn't seem to be a factor. Both the most populated state, California (37M) and Rhode Island (.49M) smallest state are in the top 5. Average Salary doesn't seem to be a differentiator. DC's average annual salary is 92.5K. South Carolina is 40K.

In some states, their Top Industry is a major factor. The devastation of the Auto Industry wrecked havoc on Michigan's economy and unemployment ratio ranking number 1 at 14.6%. The status of our country's overall economy wrecked havoc on Nevada's Gambling/Tourism industries. Rhode Island's small size may be a factor. One major layoff sends their rates into double digits. Experts say the reason for South Carolina's high rate is due to their non-unionization, making it easier for business to release their employees with little or no notice. Additionally, the NAACP has boycotted SC over the last several years due to their flying of the Confederate Flag at their state capital. They ask all minorities, minority owned businesses, not to frequent or purchase from that state. The NCAA also refuses to allow NCAA events in that state. With all of these boycotts and protests by these groups, it is sure to have an economic impact on their state.

California has their own unique problems. According to wiki, one major reason is the number of rich people in California: "in 2004, the richest 3% of state taxpayers paid approximately 60% of all state taxes. The taxable income of this population is highly dependent upon capital gains, which has been severely impacted by the stock market declines of this period." Additionally, Technology is a major factor: "California's economy is very dependent on trade and international related commerce accounts for approximately one-quarter of the state’s economy. In 2008, California exported $144 billion worth of goods, up from $134 billion in 2007 and $127 billion in 2006. Computers and electronic products are California's top export, accounting for 42 percent of all the state's exports in 2008."

However, when all is said and done, will Americans move to another state to find a job that pays less and has them work physically harder than their previous jobs? Additionally, does the fact that Americans are aging and the Boomer are rapidly approaching retirement age add into this equation? I think it does. Take for example an unemployed auto worker. Will he move to Texas to work on a construction job for $14 an hour in Texas' brutal summer heat (100+ degrees)? Will the unemployed Textile Worker in South Carolina move up to Northern Wisconsin to pick fruit and vegetables for $8 - $10 an hour? For those who say migrant laborers are impacting the unemployment rate in America, I say they are wrong. They have not studied the issues. The high Unemployment rate is NOT due to migrant laborers working. The Unemployment rate is primarily due to offshore outsourcing. We let Big Business do it and they do it. Americans, especially aging Americans, do not want the jobs, like I saw today, of construction work being subcontracted out to small companies run by ole boys who pick up day laborers.

Jim Bunning, Jon Kyl and Republicans Blatantly and Figuratively Flipping the Bird to Unemployed Americans!

Senators Jim Bunning, Jon Kyl, and the Republican Party are flipping unemployed Americans the bird! These Republicans whose votes under the Bush administration to provide the biggest tax cuts in history to the wealthy and provide extensive deregulations for big business which resulted in the economic tsunami we are currently in today and the loss of millions of American jobs causing the unemployment rate we have today, are heartlessly and relentlessly flipping the bird to the unemployed causing their unemployment benefits to be shut off last Saturday.

Today, Bunning "flipped the bird" to reporters who asked him to explain "why" he is doing this to unemployed Americans.

Almost in answer to this question, fellow Republican Jon Kyl, who is fortunate enough to receive a six figure income from the government for his current job as Senator, answered, "unemployment benefits make people not want to get a job; they are being paid even though they are not working." Millionaire Senate Paid Kyl seems out of touch, not realizing that the unemployed, even at the maximum pay, can only receive less than $400 per week, and even these benefits are Federally Taxed. Clueless Kyl doesn't realize that these unemployed, utilize these scant benefits to keep their children/families from starving.

Bunning's filibuster has not only stopped benefits to the desolate unemployed - impacting 400,000 starving Americans, his flagrant, clueless filibuster has caused a 21% cut in medicare fees, and caused 2000 Federal Transportation workers to be FURLOUGHED without pay.

When Bunning finally stops filibustering and the inevitable vote finally passes the bill, the lapses in Federal Pay will be repaid, but not without a useless cost to all of us taxpayers of millions of dollars to restart the programs. The unemployment benefits will be restored, but not without little Mary and baby Johnny from starving, without food or formula for a few days.

Ask yourselves why?

Because ole Bunning wanted to prove a point, as did ole Kyl. They are "saying" they do not want to increase our debt to China. While they never complained about the four trillion we borrowed from China during the Bush Administration for the wrongful war in Iraq, the massive tax cuts they granted the rich and the deregulation for big business, what they THINK they are accomplishing is sending a message to the crying poor American Families. "GET OFF YOUR KEESTER AND GET A JOB!" They say this as they are flipping you the bird!!

The Stimulus Tracker - Where the $$ are Going!

Economic Rescue:
What the government's money is intended to do: The Federal Government has nearly $3 Trillion invested in the economy right now, and stimulus funds are just a small portion of that investment. Where is the rest of the money going? And what is it intended to do?
1. Make credit more accessible: Term auction facility; Primary dealer credit facility; Term securities lending facility; Student loan guarantees; Foreign dollar swaps; Money market guarantees; Commercial paper funding facility
2. Bail out companies: Bear Stearns; Fannie Mae & Freddie Mac; Troubled banks; AIG; US Central adn WeCorp Credit Unions
3. Help the Auto Industry: Cash for clunkers; Enegy efficiency loans; emegency funding; auto supplier support program.
4. Stimulate the economy: Economic Stimulus Act of 2008; 2009 stimulus package
5. Prevent Foreclosures: FHA housing rescue; 2009 foreclosure fix
6. Extend unemployment aid: Benefit extensions
7. Take over Failed Banks: 2008 FDIC bank takeovers; 2009 FDIC bank takeovers
Total Allocated: $10.2533 trillion
Total Spent: $2.92301 trillion

Economic Ups and Downs

Readers Do You Agree? Unemployment Rate Artificially Inflated Until May/June

Readers,
I have a question about how the Dept of Labor calculates the Official (U3)monthly unemployment rate. (see definition below). My question is, since the Obama administration has extended the number of weeks of eligibility for unemployment, won't the official unemployment rate be skewed because those who would have been dropped (and termed "discouraged workers") at 26 weeks during the Bush administration are now receiving two or more extensions (52 and up to 76 weeks)?

I believe the calculation is:

Total # of Workers Unemployed (minus discouraged workers)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total # Workers Unemployed (minus discouraged workers) + Employed

example:

(1000 - 100)
-------------------------------- = 9% (vs 10%) and variance would continue to grow
(1000 - 100) + 9000 .. as # on extensions grow

As you can see, by the discouraged workers remaining in the equation vs being removed as they have in the past, the unemployed rate stays higher than without the unemployment extensions and these workers being taken out of the equation.

While I recognize these unemployment extensions are important and are needed, are they skewing the unemployment rate? If so, I speculate that the unemployment rate will stay at 10% until May/June timeframe since the bulk of the layoffs occurred at the end of 2008 (end of Bush term).

Once the chronically unemployed are removed from the equation, in May, it will appear there is a big improvement in our unemployment rate.

Shouldn't we talking about this?

Definition from Wiki:
The Bureau of Labor Statistics measures employment and unemployment (of those over 15 years of age) using two different labor force surveys conducted by the United States Census Bureau (within the United States Department of Commerce) and/or the Bureau of Labor Statistics (within the United States Department of Labor) that gather employment statistics monthly. The Current Population Survey (CPS), or "Household Survey", conducts a survey based on a sample of 60,000 households. This Survey measures the unemployment rate based on the ILO definition. The data are also used to calculate 5 alternate measures of unemployment as a percentage of the labor force based on different definitions noted as U1 through U6:

U1: Percentage of labor force unemployed 15 weeks or longer.
U2: Percentage of labor force who lost jobs or completed temporary work.
U3: Official unemployment rate per ILO definition.
U4: U3 + "discouraged workers", or those who have stopped looking for work because current economic conditions make them believe that no work is available for them.
U5: U4 + other "marginally attached workers", or "loosely attached workers", or those who "would like" and are able to work, but have not looked for work recently.
U6: U5 + Part time workers who want to work full time, but cannot due to economic reasons.

Note: "Marginally attached workers" are added to the total labor force for unemployment rate calculation for U4, U5, and U6. The BLS revised the CPS in 1994 and among the changes the measure representing the official unemployment rate was renamed U3 instead of U5.
The Current Employment Statistics survey (CES), or "Payroll Survey", conducts a survey based on a sample of 160,000 businesses and government agencies that represent 400,000 individual employers. This survey measures only nonagricultural, nonsupervisory employment; thus, it does not calculate an unemployment rate, and it differs from the ILO unemployment rate definition. These two sources have different classification criteria, and usually produce differing results. Additional data are also available from the government, such as the unemployment insurance weekly claims report available from the Office of Workforce Security, within the U.S. Department of Labor Employment & Training Administration.
..The unemployment figures indicate how many are not working for pay but seeking employment for pay.

U.S. New Home Sales Jump 9.6%! Thank you President Obama for Improving our Economy!

More Good Economic News! Thank you President Obama for your diligence in fixing the economic mess left for you by the previous administration. Thank you for standing strong as the unpatriotic republican pundits like Limbaugh and Beck wish for your failure and destruction of our economy. Stay strong President Obama. WE THE PEOPLE support you!

Bloomberg.com reports:
U.S. New Home Sales Jump 9.6%, Most in Four Years
Purchases of new homes in the U.S. jumped more than forecast in July, adding to signs that the economy is rebounding from the worst recession since the 1930s. Sales increased 9.6 percent, the most since February 2005, to a 433,000 annual pace, figures from the Commerce Department showed today in Washington. The number of houses on the market dropped to the lowest level in 16 years.

The gain in sales, together with rising purchases of existing homes and steadying prices, indicate the housing slump may be ending as Federal Reserve efforts to thaw credit and the Obama administration’s first-time homebuyer incentives lift demand. Job losses and mounting foreclosures mean any rebound in construction may be limited. “We’re seeing a clear pickup in housing activity,” said Michael Moran, chief economist at Daiwa Securities America Inc. in New York. “The correction phase is essentially over and we expect continued improvement, though not a vigorous pickup.”

Homebuilders’ stocks surged after the report, with the Standard & Poor’s Supercomposite Homebuilding Index gaining 3.7 percent as of 10:23 a.m. in New York. The broader S&P 500 Stock Index was up 0.4 percent at 1,031.95. Benchmark 10-year Treasury yields were little changed, at 3.45 percent.

U.S. stocks, along with crude, end at 2009 highs! Thank you President Obama!

Thanks to the great work of President Obama and his administration, U.S. Stocks along with crude ended this week at the highest level ever in 2009!!!
Republicans are looking pretty bad as they cry their crocodile tears over our Country's success! Their leader Limbaugh advocated he wanted our President and our Economy to fail! Guess What! The economy is succeeding NO THANKS TO LIMBAUGH and his right wing extremists!
MarketWatch Reports:
NEW YORK (MarketWatch) -- U.S. stocks on Friday rallied to finish at 2009 highs, with energy shares pacing the gains as the price of crude-oil futures also spiked to a their highest level this year. Unexpectedly positive data on the housing front supported the gains. The Dow Jones Industrial Average

(INDU 9,506, +155.76, +1.67%) added 155.91 points, or 1.7%, to 9,505.96. The S&P 500 /quotes/comstock/21z!i1:in\x (SPX 1,026, +18.76, +1.86%) added 18.76 points, or 1.9%, to end at 1,026.13. The Nasdaq Composite Index /quotes/comstock/10w!i:dji/delayed (INDU 9,506, +155.76, +1.67%) rose 31.68 points, to 1.6%, to 2,020.9