71% of Americans say we are still in recession

I know that the narrative on Wall Street, and some places in Washington, is that the recession is over, but Main Street feels otherwise.

More than 7 out of 10 in the U.S. say the economy is mired in recession, and the country is conflicted over how to balance concerns over joblessness and the federal budget deficit, according to a Bloomberg National Poll.

The interesting thing about this story is how it is reported. For instance:

Just like the experts, Americans are torn about whether the federal government should focus on curbing spending or creating jobs, the poll conducted July 9-12 shows. Seven of 10 Americans say reducing unemployment is the priority.

70% to 28% isn't "torn". That's a clear and overwhelming majority. You don't find a more clear mandate in a democracy.

Image Hosted by ImageShack.us

Another poll that came out today shows similar pessimism from the public.

Three in four Americans now say the effects of the recession will last another two years or more. More than eight in 10 say the condition of the economy is bad, up five points from last month...
Just 27 percent of Americans say their local job market is good. Seventy-one percent call it bad. Nearly one in four expect their household finances to get worse over the next year, twice the percentage that expects their finances to improve.

I don't know how the experts expect the consumer economy to bounce back when we are seeing these sorts of numbers.

Image Hosted by ImageShack.us

Subject Meta: 

Forum Categories: 

The NBER has not said the recession is over

The NBER, the official keeper of the business cycles, has not declared a recession end point.

The shaded areas in all St. Louis FRED graphs is where it is assumed they will declare an end point, but they have no yet and cited unemployment esp. as their reasons.

So, if the financial press wants to claim Americans just don't understand, they better tell that to the experts here.

I've read a lot of definitions from the NBER and some of the white papers and one thing is they do not need "two consecutive quarters of positive GDP growth" or two negative. Their modeling appears much more sophisticated than that. Watching the EIs, well, we'll see, I was going to try to crank out a Q2 2010 estimate but at the moment, it wouldn't surprise me at all if it comes in below 2%.

Federal Reserve meeting minutes

I'll just link to CR since he put the new GDP, unemployment estimates in a handy table.

That said, I more than agree with CR to take GDP to be lower than what the the low 3.0% 2010 annual. Frankly a lot lower.

The Fed. also raised official unemployment rates for 2011, 2012. Now that's interesting since we know people will fall off of the count. I mean how may not counted people does not need here and that implies the official counted people must be going to increase, i.e. even more job losses.

@&*)$@&*)!!!! Why cannot we not get some real policy to turn this economy around and get some real jobs?

"@&*)$@&*)!!!! Why cannot we

"@&*)$@&*)!!!! Why cannot we not get some real policy to turn this economy around and get some real jobs?"

Because it would hurt Wall St. and multi-national conglomerates. they donate more money to corrupt politicians than citizens

Jobs and recession

The thing is those experts are just hoping.
They should all feel ashamed at their poor predictions.

Not only that, but nobody knows how to create jobs properly.

But we all know that we need them now, tomorrow.

It is common sense if you create some jobs, that is less unemployment benefit for the government to pay, more income tax to receive and the employees new spending will create more jobs.

At least a year

I think we will be lucky if the economy is experiencing steady growth by the end of 2011.

Can it really surprise anyone that the MSM are....

...willful liars. That Sinclair quote comes to mind. Our society which requires that it's citizens be capable of dealing with an increasingly complicated environment, both manmade and natural, is turning out generations of 'citizens' who not only don't know who we fought against during the Revolutionary War they can't balance their own checkbooks and are utterly convinced that the economics of governing is just like the family budget.

I now assert it will take more than 'Fighting Back' as Steve G. used to say for us to survive we are going to have to...

...get smarter.

'When you see a rattlesnake poised to strike, you do not wait until he has struck to crush him.'

right, people know something is wrong

and then idiots like FAUX, Glenn Beck, seize on that popular rage and steer them to absolutely more corporate driven agendas as the "solution".

Harry Reid is clearly corrupt, corporate puppet guy. But look at his opponent, she's clueless on economic policy and the realities, plus seemingly has some sort of hatred against working people.

That's the new "choice", so it's corruption and the alternative is as usual, even worse.


...we need to find other candidates to run. It's that simple. If you visit your local Dem clubs you will see how easy it was for Obama to take over. Only a very few are taking part in determining who runs.

That means we can change from the bottom.

The only way it's gonna happen.

'When you see a rattlesnake poised to strike, you do not wait until he has struck to crush him.'

even when they have good positions in the elections

They vote against them after they win. We had a host of candidates who won in 2008, who immediately voted for more bail outs, when they swore up and down, no bail outs.

Surprise, surprise, of course we could not get real financial reform.

I agree, it's a complete boys club, even who gets selected to run. Add to that massive corporate money it's just a no win game. I mean McCain, so many Republicans, seriously, in his own party, are disgusted with him, yet when it comes to getting him out...they vote for him again. Just one of many examples.

Real analysis by the voters....

...which is what sites like this are helping to make possible, will put an end to such as Obama and Rahm's 'Blue Dogs' getting elected. It takes far more election cycles that the know-nothings of the 'Progressive Blogosphere' thinks. Just as economic theory has evolved so has the political process, Ol' Darwin's work applies to a whole lot of processes, and we are just beginning to see people wake up and realize that they have to get off the couch and take action.

Voting ain't gonna do it.

Organizing will. We are starting to see this with such as MoveOn and other lesser known groups. I use them only as an example there are others which are going to have a bigger impact in the universe of ideas. Money still roars but the 'conservative' ideology is as bankrupt and morally heinous as totalitarianism or communism ever was. The fall of capitalism is happening as we watch.

'When you see a rattlesnake poised to strike, you do not wait until he has struck to crush him.'

this is what I see currently

Most of the races have a Democrat who really needs to go, yet their opponent is even worse! So, we can't even get to the general real representatives.

It's like "pick a special interest" such as the Banksters or illegal immigrants, or the Health insurance lobby or the teachers union.

In terms of analyzing policies on the whole as in what is really good for America, that's just nowhere.

The "tea party" to me are just the same ole corporate GOP lines of crud that have been said before. Nothing "grassroots" about it from what I can see.