web analytics

It’s called the Snowball Effect

By The Troll On May 14th, 2012

When one thing piles on top of another and as it rolls it’s causality expands. This is the case of what is going on with the unemployment number in the U.S. except what is SEEN seems to be the opposite.

No President has ever been re-elected with an unemployment rate over 8% so by September the American unemployment rate will be in the 7s. Here is some interesting information on the numbers.

Report says 230,000 unemployed losing benefits over weekend

By Vicki Needham – 05/13/12 06:24 PM ET

More than 230,000 unemployed workers will lose their jobless benefits this weekend as portions of federal programs expire across several states.

All told, 409,300 long-term unemployed Americans in 27 states will have lost upward of 20 weeks of federal unemployment benefits by this past Saturday, even as the many state jobless rates remain high, according to a new analysis by the National Employment Law Project (NELP).

The latest batch of cuts affects 236,300 unemployed people in eight states — California (11%), Texas (7%) Pennsylvania (7.5%), Florida (9%), Illinois (8.8%) North Carolina (9.7%) Colorado (7.8%) and Connecticut (7.7%) — half of which have jobless rates above the 8.1 percent national average posted in April.

“A growing number of long-term unemployed workers are being left behind,” said Christine Owens, executive director of the NELP.

“Job openings are not taking the place of these cuts,” Owens said.

A tier of 13 to 20 weeks of federal jobless benefits, used by the long-term unemployed, are expiring because of legislation Congress passed in February that gradually cuts federal benefits to 79 weeks from 99. That figure includes up to 26 weeks of state-level insurance.

So what has been happening is as people run out of their benefits they are no longer counted as unemployed. They didn’t get a job, but their NOT UNEMPLOYED. As they fall of those rolls the number decreases, well enough have fallen off to bring the state rates down low enough to lose those federal extended benefits.

As I said before the US is in the Longest Greatest Depression in it’s history, Unemployment passed the previous “Great Depression” 6 months ago. Housing has completely collapsed, repossessions exceeded  “Great Depression” levels almost a year ago, add to that the 17 million new food stamp recipients, and the 48 million now living below the poverty line and you get a truer picture of conditions inside the U.S..

The snowball effect is in the massive growth of people winding up on welfare, losing their homes and all the other fun things that happen when you have no money, and there are no jobs to get. But that’s OK unemployment will be less than 8%

43 Responses to “It’s called the Snowball Effect”

  1. Troll,

    Maybe this http://homelandsecurityus.com/archives/5923 and this http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jDR7z-SCLGQ&feature=related have something to do with all those pissed off (mostly wite middle class folks) who are about to lose their benefits.

  2. We have similar political manouvering in the UK. The ‘socialists’ make it easy to get welfare via various means including medical disability, which greatly reduces the numbers on the unemployed roll, – all good for future ‘vote catching’, but wrecking the long term overall economy.

    The ‘conservatives’, get elected, in their turn, and proceed to tighten up the rules, with the resulting bad publicity that inevitably follows any withdrawal of benefits, and thus putting more people on the unemployed roll.

    Welfare is a political football, not provided for any humane reason, but as just another tool for vote manipulation.

    That they do such things at the wrong time, when unemployment is already at a high level seems to be beyond their understanding.

    That we have massive umemployment and any ex-welfarists have little or no chance of finding even the most menial of jobs, matters little to the politicians. The tories prefer to see people being paid unemployment benefit rather than disability benefit, – it makes it so much easier to pass the blame onto those lazy workers, and to coin such stupid quotes as ‘Get on ye bike!’ and ‘They are here to do the jobs the Bits won’t do!’, when any question of excessive immigration is raised.

    The tories decision to close a number of small factories under the name of Remploy, which provide not just work, but vital therapy and support for the mentally and physically impaired, and have been in existence for many years, just has to be the most inhumane and thoughtless action any govenment could take. Then to further add that, ‘Oh! they can always get employment in the general workplace’, shows just how out-of-touch with reality these people are.

    It is’t just tenth-rate comedians who call these vulnearble folks ‘mongs’and other derogatory names.

    Why can they not understand that we are a country with a high cost of living, caused more by high, and ever increasing taxation than by any fictitious high standard of living, and that we no longer have the jobs to support those high levels.

    There will always be, for any forseeble future, an ever increasing number of unemployed,which will have to be supported by an ever increasing and expensive welfare roll.

    The problem is they just cannot continue to print money – a self-defeating excercise if ever there was one, and as the ability to borrow larger and larger sums of money decreases, there will be problems that make today’s ones seem insignificant.

    Global levels of borrowing are now so high that defaults will become the norm, not the exception.

    When we sent out those party invites we should have ordered a much large cake, such a pity that many will now go without!

  3. Good post Ernest.
    Especially,
    “The tories decision to close a number of small factories under the name of Remploy, which provide not just work, but vital therapy and support for the mentally and physically impaired, and have been in existence for many years, just has to be the most inhumane and thoughtless action any govenment could take. Then to further add that, ‘Oh! they can always get employment in the general workplace’, shows just how out-of-touch with reality these people are.”

    I once worked in a day centre in Colindale, London.
    We had a work system in which a group of people sat round a large table stapling webbing straps onto thick 2″ square cards. The straps were then used as lifting handles for large cardboard boxes.
    No one minded doing it, they didn’t have to, but for that group of disabled people and stroke victims, it was better than sitting around. (Quite a few of that group claimed? to be Jewish, Allan.)

    Then they took the work away -must have been around 1978?- on the grounds that the work was demeaning and exploitative…. :(

  4. we are all in deep shit

  5. Troll,

    And to think, I took 45 lines to say just that!…

  6. lol

  7. It might help to review history before claiming what history has told us. For instance, FDR won re-election in 1936 with unemployment about double of what it is today (in a landslide). So the claim that no President has won wit hunemployment at a rate of 8% or higher is inaccurate.

    I can see why the 8% figure is chosen here, because Ron Reagan won with about 7.4 percent unemployment (also in a landslide).

    In any event, Obama neither inherited or created a depression greater than the one we in the US had in the 1930s. It sure isn’t much comfort to those struggling now, but lets try to keep things in perspective.

  8. you wouldn’t know perspective if it bit you.

    The 8% line is the common theme repeated over and over in the press, don’t act like it’s something I just spun out of nothing, or that you have never heard it before.

    The fact that you and others want to live in denial about the depression is not surprising, facts especially hard ones have never been anything your ilk have ever been able to face honestly.

  9. //live in denial about the depression is not surprising//

    Troll, you..er.. know not of what you speak.

    The present state of the economy in the US is hardly even a recession, never mind a depression. The US economy has shrunk a few percent since it started; but throughout US history it contracted by more than 15 pc about half a dozen times, in the Great Depression by 27 pc.

    “facts especially hard ones”, as you say.

  10. the economy is NOT employment, one third of the adult work force is out of work Noel. The Obama administration has compounded every problem 10 fold in just 3 1/2yrs.

    The stock market has grown, sure and money is still being made, your right even in collapse the US outshines every other nation on earth, (we can make a profit selling ice to Eskimos) that doesn’t change the misery.

  11. Troll – So I take it you don’t wish to revise your claim that no President has been re-elected with more than 8% unemployment, despite the fact it is patently untrue?

    I’m suprised you were not aware of the unemployment numbers when Reagan was re-elected. In his case he was running agaisnt a lesser candidate (as was FDR) and people felt that despite problems Reagan and FDR presented the best alternative to their challenger.

    No sensible person would suggest the present recession is worse than the Great Depression of the 1930s.

  12. no honest person would deny it.

    So you won’t admit that you have heard the 8% line at least once every time the unemployment numbers have come out in the record breaking LONGER THAN THE GREAT DEPRESSION run of unemployment above 8% under Obama?

  13. I already admitted the line wasn’t mine and NEVER claimed it was but you havent seen any of these?

    No president since FDR has won re-election with unemployment …
    caffertyfile.blogs.cnn.com/…/no-president-since-fdr-has-won-re-elect…
    Dec 5, 2011 – No president since FDR has won re-election with unemployment over 7.2%. Is … Not doomed, no President since FDR ever inherited a near depression, … We were laughing out loud over the weekend watching the news and …
    Can President Obama win re-election if unemployment goes back …
    caffertyfile.blogs.cnn.com/…/can-president-obama-win-re-election-if…
    Feb 22, 2012 – Gas prices are already at their highest levels ever for this time of year … wisdom says that Presidents don’t get re-elected if unemployment is above 8% … Presidential elections are no longer about the economy, they are about …
    No sitting President has ever been Re Elected with above 6.5 …
    answers.yahoo.com › … › Politics & Government › Elections
    9 answers – Apr 8
    Top answer: You better pick someone else other then Romney because he is just as likely to get my vote as Obama is likely to get my vote.
    Fact is….. No president has been re elected with unemployment …‎ – Mar 10, 2012
    No president has been elected with unemployment over 8 percent …‎ – Mar 9, 2012
    U.S. Presidents have been re-elected with high unemployment …‎ – Dec 22, 2011
    No President ever re-elected with unemployment over 7 …‎ – Dec 1, 2011

    More results from answers.yahoo.com »
    No President Re-Elected With Unemployment Above 7.2% | Video …
    ► 3:58► 3:58

    video.foxbusiness.com/…/no-president-re-elected-with…Jul 12, 2011 – 4 min
    No President Re-Elected With Unemployment Above 7.2%. Jul 12, 2011. – 3:58 -. Rep. … Is Gen Y The Most …
    More videos for no president ever elected with … »
    Opinion: Obama not the man America voted for – New York Daily News
    articles.nydailynews.com/…/30394432_1_youth-vote-unemployment…
    Nov 13, 2011 – For the first time ever, the United States has lost its AAA credit rating, … No recent President has been re-elected with unemployment above …
    CBO delivers devastating numbers to Obama’s reelection efforts …
    communities.washingtontimes.com/…/cbo-delivers-devastating-numb…
    Feb 16, 2012 – President Barack Obama’s reelection efforts received a terrible blow today … in December 2009 and has remained above that level ever since.” … Historically, presidents do not get re-elected with unemployment over 7.2%.
    No “American” President, since FDR, ever re-elected with …
    forums.military.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/…/m/8580029472001
    1 post – 1 author – Jun 24, 2011
    No “American” President, since FDR, has ever been re-elected with unemployment greater than 7.2% on election day. Clearly, in 2012 …
    Unpacking the Unemployment Lie | 538 Refugees
    538refugees.wordpress.com/2011/…/unpacking-the-unemployment-l…
    Jun 3, 2011 – So there is a meme floating about on the Internet that no President since WWII has ever been re-elected with unemployment above 8%.
    Election 2012: Unemployment Rate Can Be Less Important Than …
    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/…/jobs-election-unemployment-2012_n_1...
    Jan 8, 2012 – In a presidential election year, the unemployment trend can be more … to 1956 no incumbent president has lost when unemployment fell over the ….. Wow – you need to get real – he is the worst president the US has ever had !
    Unemployment Rate Key to 2012 Election – ABC News
    abcnews.go.com/blogs/…/unemployment-rate-key-to-2012-election/
    Jan 6, 2012 – As the 2012 election season unfolds, there may be no better number … only be the second president re-elected with unemployment above 6%.

    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

    just the first page of a google search that showed “About 143,000,000 results (0.32 seconds” with the search no president reelected with unemployment above….

    so your bubble must be that either you only read the sports page or what the New Yorker?

  14. The current situation isn’t nearly as bad as the Great Depression

    It is an insult to those who survived that ordeal to say that this is worse, or even that they are close.

    Things are bad, but no purpose is served by such gross exaggeration.

    And the current problems all began under GW Bush. Even Bush does not deny that, but Republicans try yo spin it as being something that began under Obama

  15. Troll – If you read what you wrote you’ll see you didn’t limit it to “no President since FDR”.

    I think you are having some difficulty understanding the real impact of the Great Depression. Or you do understand it, but chose to ignore it.

  16. notice it’s the two NYrs….

    Phantom the difference between then and now and why it doesn’t “seem” as bad is because when the great depression hit in the 30s there were no such things as, foodstamps, unemployment, welfare, etc etc.

    So people like you because you don’t see soup lines there must not be a problem. The soup lines are the food stamps which have gone up 17 million this year alone

  17. stop spinning Mahons

  18. “there were no such things as, foodstamps, unemployment, welfare, etc etc.”

    Actually foodstamps were first used during the Great Depression.

  19. Troll – It is kind of funny that you’ve indicated things don’t seem as bad as they were in the Great Depression because of liberal programs like foodstamps, unemployment benefits, welfare.

  20. You guys don’t want the govt to do anything, so we should get rid of food stamps, unemployment, etc., and throw the working man to the mercy of the market and the bosses. That always worked before, right?

    All the companies I see as part of my work – which include automakers, steel makers, retail stores, specialty chemical companies, real estate operations, etc. – bottomed out a long time ago. Some have had revenue increases of 40% since the bad days of 2009. A lot of them have added to staff, but not proportionately to the increase in sales, since modern manufacturing is a very automated process.

    And most of the companies I speak to are in places like Ohio, Texas, Rhode Island, California and places like that. Not NY. They are very successful national / international companies run by very competent executives who know what is going on. None of them are as negative as you or other doctrinaire or political writers here are. They are cautious, but they are optimistic for the long term.

  21. Mahons
    It surprises you that a rightwinger see’s the benefits of aid because you believe the propaganda, that we want to throw grandma from the train or off the clift.

    I am a firm supporter in a hand up, just not a permanent hand out, Teach a man to fish.

    Phantom do yourself a favor and be very cautious with any people that you are dealing with from California who don’t see a problem in the economy…lol

  22. “You guys don’t want the govt to do anything”

    You’re reading at last!

    “so we should get rid of food stamps, unemployment, etc., and throw the working man to the mercy of the market and the bosses. That always worked before, right?”

    Well certainly the downtrodden masses will be better off once we allow the magic of the market to flourish. Bloated plutocrats, less so.

    “All the companies I see as part of my work … bottomed out a long time ago. Some have had revenue increases of 40% since the bad days of 2009.”

    Yes, I’ve explained many times that Bernanke has and is inflating the economy. It’s just another printed up, economic sugar-rush. It will pass, badly, when the printing ends.

  23. Troll

    Your attitude to aid is correct. Please instruct Pete on that subject. You’re in charge of that.

    There is still unimaginable wealth in California, despite everything.

  24. yeah they’re just not allowed to use or touch it, and Pete is right about the money.

    Pete what is your view on temporary aid, until the we can hang the bastards at the Fed, and remove the politicians that stand in the way of a true free market?

  25. The Pontius Pilate Party doesn’t want any aid to any workers under any conditions.

    The market is all knowing and will take care of everthing.

  26. Troll –

    Temporary aid, as in temporary government (taxpayer) welfare?

    It’s theft and immoral, of course, but I wouldn’t do away with it immediately. A free marketeer has more important battles in the short term, and if, say, a President Paul (this is hypothetical) tried to end all welfare immediately then there’d be violence. This would only benefit the State in the end.

    However, a welfare reduction plan, say over a decade, is right, achievable and necessary. It’s right because vast looting of the productive class would end. It’s achievable because almost all people can get their shit together within a decade. It’s necessary – and leftists should note this – because the Western, regulatory/welfare State is bust.

    Our welfare states are coming to an end – there is no avoiding it. It is a mathematical certainty. The productive class can no longer afford to meet the cost. Governments are now borrowing mega-amounts to meet the cost. Well they cannot do this forever, so we can have orderly wind downs or a sudden and catastrophic end with violence.

    We can choose our preferred end, but to not acknowledge that our welfare states are unsustainable is to ignore reality.

    If we implemented such plans we’d rediscover what our Victorian and Edwardian forebears knew as a simple fact of life – that individuals and society are extraordinarly generous, without being coerced, and that voluntary welfare would again flourish, as it did before the welfare states crowded out voluntary giving.

  27. Many rich people wouldn’t give the poor the steam off their piss if there were not safety nets in place by the evil gummint

  28. Liberalism/socialism/communism the umbrella of the everyone gets paid something for nothing past 100 years has already died, the body just hasn’t stopped moving yet.

    Liberalism/socialism/communism never functioned and in the last two decades it’s western version has morphed into thuggish veiled fascism. We are witnessing it’s death throws on a global scale.

    The question is will we limp through the pain or will the planet explode once more into global war?

  29. bull Phantom, for a liberal ye have little faith in your fellow man

  30. Phantom’s always has the lowest opinion of his fellow man.

  31. Trust me on this

    Your boy Trump comes to mind.

  32. http://www.thesmokinggun.com/documents/celebrity/trump-least-charitable-billionaire-109247

  33. Hey Pete Ron Paul just bailed out…..http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2012/may/14/ron-paul-ends-his-hunt-votes/

    He ends his active bid without having won the vote in any state, though he did end up with the most bound delegates in Maine, thanks to his delegate-maximizing strategy.

  34. Poor Ron.

  35. The Texas primary election is May 29.

    Ron Paul did not want to be crushed in his home state, and he would have been crushed.

  36. Yet again, Ron Paul proves what a great president he would be.

    In a nutshell, he’s still in the race, he’s still campaigning in caucus states, but he won;t be campaigning in primary states:

    “Doing so with any hope of success would take many tens of millions of dollars we simply do not have.”

    I.e. he won’t spend money he doesn;t have, he won’t put it on the tick and he won’t lure in creditors only to stiff them later on. What a great, moral, upstanding man he is.

    In the end though, it’s a little win for Goldman Sachs, JP Morgan, Citibank and the other Wall Street oligarchs who have poured Fed money the puppet Romney’s way.

  37. A nutshell does come to mind when thinking of Ron Paul.

    Oh the satisfaction of this farce.

  38. LOL… good Mahons

  39. “Farce” – ?

  40. Pete – may the farce be with you.

  41. Speaking of which…

    I was going to post these as a new thread, but I won’t bother.

    See this
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0x3Z1e3UPV8

    and especially this
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vzKU3D-1xsY

    These were actually made by his supporters. I made a comment the other day about ” Trekkies ” and did a search. There really are Ron Paul Trekkies! This guy has the best supporters in the universe.

  42. We’ve been here before and I’m sure that it will be discussed again but many people don’t grasp the fact that removal of unemployment benefits in the US means that the name is also removed from the list of unemployed – even though the former recipient of benefits has not got a job. The unemployment benefits are only paid for a duration (one year?) so it could be possible for the unemployment rate as swindled currently calculated to be 8% yet have 25% of the workforce without a job. By strange coincidence, that’s what there really is!!

    http://theeconomiccollapseblog.com/archives/there-are-100-million-working-age-americans-that-do-not-have-jobs

    – The unemployment crisis in America is much worse than you are being told. Did you know that there are 100 million working age Americans that do not get up in the morning and go to work? No wonder why it seems like there are so many people that do not have jobs! According to the federal government, there are 12.6 million working age Americans that are considered to be “officially” unemployed, but there are another 87.8 million working age Americans that are not working either. The federal government considers those Americans to be “not in the labor force” so they are not included in the unemployment rate. In fact, this is one of the key ways that the government manipulates the unemployment numbers. -

  43. Allan

    Do you like the Trekkie Ron Paul videos?

    Would Alex Jones approve ?

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.