Saturday, September 08, 2012

The LuLac Edition #2189, September 8th, 2012

A House On Fire 


Friday the monthly Jobs report came out and as usual it was in the eye of the beholder. No sane person is ever going to be pleased with a report that does not grow jobs at a fast rate. But the doomsayers who are saying this report was not a good one is just beyond my comprehension. For the 30th month in a row, there was job growth. These reports need to be viewed in the prism of how far we’ve come. To recap, when Mr. Obama took office, the U.S. economy was losing jobs at about 750,000 a month. Even though the numbers increasing are not in the half millions, they are going in the right direction. So the question remains, do you want to go forward or go back? I was around in 2009 and paying attention. After my cancer situation of 2006 through 2008 I thought I was home free. Who gets laid off from a Health Care Insurance carrier that has a 60 million dollar surplus and 900 employees? I did. And about 42 others. We were part of that 750,000 jobs lost. The economic house of America was burning down. And it wasn’t only in Northeastern Pennsylvania. It was a across the country. GM was weeks away from going broke. Manufacturing had pretty much ceased and banks were not lending any money. People were losing their houses. (And I’m not going to make moral judgments on whether they overshot their American dream with something bigger or better, they were going to be put out.) And if you did decide to spend money using credit cards, you could be sure if you were a minute late on that payment, you’d get hit with fees that would make a loan shark seem like an innocent. The House was burning down. Period. The Obama Administration set about putting the fire out. The Stimulus Plan should have been bigger but Obama was fought by unpatriotic in his own party. And he should have knocked heads together and made their political lives miserable. (Instead he watched the Super Bowl with them!) The GOP on the day after his Inauguration said , “We won’t help”. The fires thanks to some prudent economic policy were put out. But the rebuilding is tough. The house was leveled. Brick by economic brick this administration has had 30 months of job growth. Republicans will tell you it’s not good enough, not fast enough. I agree. But you can’t take charred remains and turn them into silk. Here’s a statement regarding the latest Jobs report and I’ve highlighted some important points. 
While there is more work that remains to be done, the recent employment report provides further evidence that the U.S. economy is continuing to recover from the worst downturn since the Great Depression. It is critical that we continue the policies that are building an economy that works for the middle class as we dig our way out of the deep hole that was caused by the severe recession that began in December 2007. To create more jobs in particularly hard-hit sectors, President Obama continues to support the elements of the American Jobs Act that have not yet passed, including further investment in infrastructure to rebuild our Nation’s ports, roads and highways, and assistance to State and local governments to prevent layoffs and to enable them to rehire hundreds of thousands of teachers and first responders. To build on the progress of the last few years, President Obama has also proposed an extension of middle class tax cuts that would prevent the typical middle class family from facing a $2,200 tax increase next year. The report from the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) shows that private sector establishments added 103,000 jobs last month, and overall non-farm payroll employment rose by 96,000. The economy has now added private sector jobs for 30 straight months, for a total of 4.6 million jobs during that period. 
The household survey showed that the unemployment rate declined from 8.3% to 8.1% in August. 
Employment rose notably in leisure and hospitality (+34,000), 
professional and business services (+28,000), 
health care and social assistance (+21,700), 
and wholesale trade (+7,900). 
Manufacturing lost 15,000 jobs, including a 7,500 drop in motor vehicles and parts, which is partly payback for their having been relatively few seasonal auto plant shutdowns in July. Over the past 30 months, manufacturers have added more than 500,000 jobs. 
Let me turn to government. I know I have been a bit harsh on public employees, especially those who work at the Luzerne County Courthouse. If I seemed a little nasty, I apologize. But with so many people saying government is not the answer, it is tough to defend that when you have a guy selling cars on the side and people bitching about not working an eight hour work day. Government helps our society function. And when GOP partisans say that government should be cut, the government is too big or I want government out of my life (except of course in the case of their women’s vaginas) look at these figures. 
Government lost 7,000 jobs, as state government payrolls fell by 6,000 and local governments shed 4,000 jobs. Since February 2010, State and local governments have lost 504,000 jobs. Seems like there is more crime in the neighborhood? Can’t get through to that State agency you have to get an answer for on an issue important to you? Worried about why that state flood money is being processed so slow? It’s because government jobs were lost. That’s not the President’s fault, it is because there is a war on government. Paul Kanjorski said it best, “When you drink a glass of clean water or eat a piece of meat, you don’t give it a second thought because government made taking that step safe for you!" But the GOP will rail about big government. That burning house is still standing. Being rebuilt. And no one in this country could have done anything different. And if they said they could, where the hell were they? Oh yes, that’s right, they were saying NO. 


Former Congressional candidate Dr. Joe Leonardi is burning up the airwaves with numerous appearances regarding his weight loss philosophy. Leonardi will be a on the Dr. O Show. The Dr. O show can be heard on line Joe will be discussing his book Obesity Undone and spreading the message of UN-complicating weight loss and fitness. Additionally, there is some discussion about healthcare politics, and what people need to know going forward in regards to the current health care system. Weight loss is a side effect of fitness --- fitness is not the end result of weight loss. Undo obesity and don't simply lose weight --- gain health and live the better life. Obesity Undone is available at in both paperback and kindle version. Physical Culturist and Chiropractor Dr. Joe Leonardi is available for media interviews, you may contact him via email or phone (570) 760-6121. If you desire to undo your own obesity and get fit, subscribe to, and start taking your health back today.


At 1:32 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Once more you write a compelling article that makes all of us step back and think. My 401K went in the tank in 2009 and I lost a lot of money due to the Wall Street Greed Pigs that nearly ruined us. Why aren't any of those bastards in jail? I'm not thrilled Obama didn't gpo after them but I'm afraid if Romney is elected, he'll invite them to stay in the Lincoln bedroom!

At 10:16 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

He promised he'd fix the economy and all he did was spend $5 trillion dollars (and counting) and stabilize things.
Sorry but that's not getting the job done and when you add in the hundreds of rounds of golf he's played during this economic crisis, who in their right mind would rehire this guy? This guy is a great campaigner who loves being President but has no passion for actually doing the job. If he hired him to renovate your house i gurantee you would fire him but I guess you feel its ok to give the President more leeway. I am not a big fan of Romney but it is time for a new leader.

At 1:39 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

I fear the Lincoln bedroom has been for sale for a long long time.
Sure things arent good and could certainly be better, but a Romney presidency would be a disaster. I too would like to turn the clock back to "simpler" times, but not at the expense of social issues where so much progress has been made.
By the way that looks like the picture of Bob Cordaro's house burning.

Carey Avenue Jack

At 2:24 PM, Blogger David Yonki said...

He promised he'd fix the economy and all he did was spend $5 trillion dollars (and counting) and stabilize things.
and when you add in the hundreds of rounds of golf he's played during this economic crisis, who in their right mind would rehire this guy?

At 3:16 PM, Blogger Aggie95 said...

Yonk ...well let me ask you this yonk ....did the number of jobs created cover the growth in population .....No did not .....did the number of jobs created keep up with the number of legal immigrants ..... no it did not ......unemployment dropped because 360,000 people just gave up ....the % of people working fell to a rate not seen since 1981 tell me what the good news was yonk .....these oh so positive jobs number you seem to like ....well as I said elsewhere is like eating iceburg lettuce ....if you eat enough of it you'll starve to death

At 5:36 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

The difference in the number of folks working when BHO took office and today is negative 11.2%.

At 8:13 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

God help us all except the richest of the rich if the last of the draft dodgers and the marathion man get elected!
That does look like Bob the C's house. If it was a couple weeks ago before the bank took it, I'd think Geno the Torch from Dunmore was back in town.


At 6:46 AM, Blogger Aggie95 said...

so tell us where obama and biden served....biden had 5 deferrments then he had himself re classified

At 6:48 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Two narratives seem to be forming to describe the underlying causes of the financial crisis. One, as outlined in a New York Times front-page story on Sunday, December 21, is that President Bush excessively promoted growth in home ownership without sufficiently regulating the banks and other mortgage lenders that made the bad loans. The result was a banking system suffused with junk mortgages, the continuing losses on which are dragging down the banks and the economy. The other narrative is that government policy over many years--particularly the use of the Community Reinvestment Act and Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to distort the housing credit system-- underlies the current crisis. The stakes in the competing narratives are high. The diagnosis determines the prescription. If the Times diagnosis prevails, the prescription is more regulation of the financial system; if instead government policy is to blame, the prescription is to terminate those government policies that distort mortgage lending.
There really isn’t any question of which approach is factually correct: right on the front page of the Times edition of December 21 is a chart that shows the growth of home ownership in the United States since 1990. In 1993 it was 63 percent; by the end of the Clinton administration it was 68 percent. The growth in the Bush administration was about 1 percent. The Times itself reported in 1999 that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were under pressure from the Clinton administration to increase lending to minorities and low-income home buyers--a policy that necessarily entailed higher risks. Can there really be a question, other than in the fevered imagination of the Times, where the push to reduce lending standards and boost home ownership came from?
The fact is that neither political party, and no administration, is blameless; the honest answer, as outlined below, is that government policy over many years caused this problem. The regulators, in both the Clinton and Bush administrations, were the enforcers of the reduced lending standards that were essential to the growth in home ownership and the housing bubble.
THERE ARE TWO KEY EXAMPLES of this misguided government policy. One is the Community Reinvestment Act (CRA). The other is the affordable housing “mission” that the government-sponsored enterprises (GSEs) Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were charged with fulfilling.
As originally enacted in 1977, the CRA vaguely mandated regulators to consider whether an insured bank was serving the needs of the “whole” community. For 16 years, the act was invoked rather infrequently, but 1993 marked a decisive turn in its enforcement. What changed? Substantial media and political attention was showered upon a 1992 Boston Federal Reserve Bank study of discrimination in home mortgage lending. This study concluded that, while there was no overt discrimination in banks’ allocation of mortgage funds, loan officers gave whites preferential treatment. The methodology of the study has since been questioned, but at the time it was highly influential with regulators and members of the incoming Clinton administration; in 1993, bank regulators initiated a major effort to reform the CRA regulations.

At 6:58 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

From the current handwringing, you’d think that the banks came up with the idea of looser underwriting standards on their own, with regulators just asleep on the job. In fact, it was the regulators who relaxed these standards--at the behest of community groups and "progressive" political forces.… For years, rising house prices hid the default problems since quick refinances were possible. But now that house prices have stopped rising, we can clearly see the damage done by relaxed loan standards.

At 7:03 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

What's the difference between the sub prime lending mess and the student loan program?


Just watch how the kids act once it hits them that they are $60K and up beholden to the government...they'll scream louder than their parents who got sucked in. And watch how the "market" for diplomas goes in the dumper.

At 10:48 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Obama didnt avoid the draft like Romney. He is the last of the draft dodger candidates, period.
As to Biden and Ryan, they arent running for the top spot. Too bad if it offends you Agnes, but I still have a hard on for these guys including Bill Clinton.

A Vietnam Vet and Goddamn Proud of
having served still. Wanna compare medals?

At 12:12 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Obama like most of his generation could have served but it really didnt make much sense for an intelligent young guy. There was no longer a draft and were I part of that generation I wouldnt have considered military service.
Avoiding the draft like so many who are my age and Gov Romneys did
was wrong for future super patriots like Clinton, Romney, Cheney and as you say Biden among others. My recollection is that no rich kids of my era went. I served in Vietnam and like 10:48 am proud of my service and my fellow draftees and all Vets. I volunteered for the draft and served two years at a time when enlistment meant a minimum of three. I consider it a character building experience.
Something those guys who avoided service by whatever means can never know or share.

Pete Cassidy

At 7:00 AM, Blogger Aggie95 said...

So your draft dodgers are O.K. then

Clinton Questioned about How He Avoided Military Service
By Paul West
The Baltimore Sun


Arkansas Gov. Bill Clinton's presidential campaign was sidetracked again Thursday, this time over new questions about how he avoided military service at the height of the Vietnam War.

For Clinton, the issue is not new -- it first surfaced when he entered politics in the 1970s.

Besieged by reporters at campaign stops in Manchester and Nashua, the governor gave a calm but forceful defense of his behavior, 23 years ago. Clinton said that, after first attempting to avoid conscription, he decide to expose himself to the draft. He was never called because he drew a high number in the 1969 draft lottery.

But proposed reforms in the draft system, widely publicized at the time Clinton was changing his draft status, raise questions about whether he thought he was putting himself at risk.

Retired Col. Eugene Holmes, then the commander of the Army ROTC program at the University of Arkansas, was quoted in Thursday's Wall Street Journal as saying that Clinton, then a Rhodes Scholar at Oxford University in England, "was able to manipulate things" so that he was not conscripted in the fall of 1969. He told the paper that Clinton had misled him into thinking he would be returning to Arkansas within a couple of months, rather than spending the entire academic year in England.

Clinton, disagreeing, says he does not know why Holmes, now 75, would make such a statement. He says the ROTC commander had encouraged him to go back for his second year at Oxford, since he could not attend ROTC training camp until the following summer.

Both men agree that during the summer of 1969, Clinton told Holmes he intended to enroll at the Arkansas law school and wanted to join the ROTC program there. Instead, Clinton went to Yale Law School and never joined ROTC.

As a result of his oral commitment to join the ROTC, Clinton got a draft deferment for September and October 1969, the two months he had been told that he was likely to be called up.

At 5:25 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Really? Obama is rewarding returning Vets with benefit cuts and DD budget cuts. Your brothers in arms are being sold down the river and your locked into 1960's logic?! Wake up Vet - BHO don't give a r**s *ss about your medals and you'll reward him with your support? Might want to look at an alternative...

At 11:16 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Thanks for the history lesson and the advice, but I already knew about Willie' draft record and Bidens and I dont consider the alternative viable for the Country I love! Also I made my position on Clinton and all draft dodgers crystal clear!
Again thanks to you and Agnes for your kind and sympathetic advice and education.
As to 60s logic at least my generation had the balls to stand up and protest unlike todays wussies who play violent video
games and stay on the couch.
I too came out against the war after serving.
Lastly you are right medals dont mean shit to anybody. Never did!
Fortunately I didnt have the bad taste to die for mine.


Post a Comment

<< Home