So much for recovery
 

Fed: 'Widespread signs' economy is slowing

Scenario: Double Dip Recession

NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) -- The economy grew at a sluggish pace through the summer months, and there are now "widespread signs" that activity is slowing, the Federal Reserve said Wednesday in its latest snapshot of regional economic conditions.

Economic growth continued at a modest pace in 7 of the central bank's 12 districts, according to the September edition of the Fed's Beige Book, which is published eight times a year.


http://money.cnn.com/2010/09/08/news...oogle_business


I guess we need more stimulus and government employees.

What recovery?

We've been in a deep recession ever since shortly after those flimflam Wall Street banks went belly up in September '08 :disgust

"double-dip" is what it will be branded as, although no recovery has taken place to speak of, other than minor false recovery propped up by government handouts.

the Bank of Canada increased its interest rate to 1.0% today. In the official release, they said the recovery in the rest of the world economy is "uneven." Hmph.

You seem confused. The stimulus wasn't created or designed to grow the economy. :thumbsup

You are kidding right? That is the POINT to stimulating something so that it will become aroused. Too bad America has a limp dick for Obama.

I didn't say it didn't stimulate, which it did do. As well, you seem confused on what the bill was designed to do as well and what it did do. Try google, it's a great resource of information.

No confusion here.


Obama Aims $50 Billion Stimulus at Nation's Transit
http://www.treehugger.com/files/2010...n-stimulus.php

I am not confused at all what the bill was supposed to do, Obama just KEEPS ON SPENDING IT THE WRONG WAY.

This 'stimulus' has nothing to do with today's situation, it's clearly not the stimulus package either.

As well I don't consider taking away tax cuts from oil companies and moving that money to correct / rebuild our Country as a stimulus, but more of an investment for sure when the rest of the money is paid for directly from bonds, investments, etc from the citizens.

So saving teachers jobs, firemen and police jobs was spending it the wrong way? Or maybe it would have been better to cut unemployment benefits for the last 18 months on millions of people?

Being that you know what the stimulus was about, what about the stimulus was spent in the wrong way? I would love to know.

You can call it what you want but your boy Obama has been running around calling all of these stimulus' "job creators" since he's been in office. And we've been bleeding jobs like crazy all along.

what does a "stimulus" mean but to "stimulate." don't be a retard jesus ...

just because it failed doesn't mean you can change definitions ...

Obama chose the "government spending" route, obviously it failed big time.
http://www.time.com/time/nation/arti...870575,00.html

america has to rebuild the productive economy it shipped overseas the last 40 years. until it does that all the low interest rates and super trains wont do shit ...

No, he said 'parts' would create jobs but the focus was to save them, it did both but wasn't as successful as they wanted. That damn sure doesn't mean it didn't work.

It was also forecasted that the saved/created jobs would not out balance the loss. It wasn't like this was hidden.

The stimulus was never designed to turn things around. It was never said it would stop everything from happening, that growth in jobs/etc would turn around... it was actually said the other way around, that the very last thing that would happen is jobs would be created.

TheDoc is trying to use semantics comparing the 2008 Stimulus package to Obamas failed recovery package. Regardless both were administered under his tutelage and they are bother historic boondoggles.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economi...us_Act_of_2008
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/America...nt_Act_of_2009

It didn't fail... it did exactly what it should have done and is working.

Clearly you have no idea how much was spent, thinking he took the gov spending directly is just an uneducated and blatant stupid statement.

Hahaha, what? The Economic Stimulus act of 2008 was signed into law on February 13, 2008 by President Bush.

Semantics pfft... let's just use facts.

It DID fail even by his own administrations projections. He has amassed more debt in his Presidency than all of the previous Presidents combined.

Cash for Clunkers was a bust, his mortgage rescue plan was a bust, etc etc they all have failed to "stimulate" us into "recovery".


About the only thing he spent on money that did work was the RA signs. :1orglaugh:1orglaugh PURE PROPAGANDA
http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/op...101483644.html

http://www.dot.state.oh.us/Divisions...ly%28Sm%29.jpg

No, he didn't say the stimulus failed. Why would he say that when it's not even fully going and not even half the money has been spent? Damn that would be stupid of him.

You are one uneducated freak... Thinking Obama has spent more than any President in history, what a joke. Seriously, shut fox news off.

I don't expect every idea to work, that's kinda expecting a lot being that it's never happened with any other President. So a few plans and ideas don't kick it how they want or expect, damn glad they tried though - it's much better of a solution than doing nothing.

And that is where you are wrong.

Right... cause doing nothing was working so well!

I didnt say he SPENT more than any other President, I said he amassed more DEBT than all other US Presidents combined. You lie... just like your President, Obama would be proud of you.

Wow wrong two times in a row not bad :thumbsup

Economic correction is way better than passing the debt on, it just PROLONGS our recession.

Obama did not create the huge spike in debt that we have today. But yes, if you want to say each President before Obama has amassed more debt in history, while being President then that would be true in modern times.

No, you're wrong... now 2 times in a row - thanks for playing the revolving door game :thumbsup

Just because you were not paying attention to what the government was doing BEFORE the collapse does not mean nothing was being done. The things the government DID DO caused the collapse. Now they have you fooled into thinking they did nothing so they can do MORE. Yup more government to solve problems caused by more government. :upsidedow

Ahh... What Economic corrections?

The debt would have been passed on either way, we had debt when we didn't have a recession.

I know exactly what happened... whatever was being done before is not what is being done today.

Bush never tried to correct the economy, he did 'nothing' to actually rebuild the economy.

When Obama took over the total debt was just over 10 trillion, it is now at 13.4 trillion. In his first two years of office he has amassed a debt of 3 trillion at LEAST.

Of course that debt will be passed on but he just increased that debt by 33% in two years, he is a fucking disaster for this country.

What we need is another interstate project or a Hoover Dam. That's job creation for ya!

Oh my.. funny stuff.

That's called a correction of the books. IE: Bush did not put the war costs and some other costs on the budget, on the actual books - so you didn't know how much it really cost. One of Obama's campaign promises was to correct this, and he did..

He himself has not increased or spend 3 trillion dollars. You could never find or explain the 3 trillion. Now, you can find 400 million worth, which would be the correct answer.

Anything else?

Bush inherited a recession from Clinton.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Early_2000s_recession

He did do many things to try and stimulate the economy, one was bad and the other was good, the tax cuts were positive for the economy, the deregulation was bad.

Wow you really are a pathological liar, is that what Democrats have resorted to these days? Just flat out lie even when presented with the facts in their face?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_public_debt

Its like a temp agency on steroids. :thumbsup:1orglaugh:1orglaugh

Too stupid to know what a lie is and too stupid to know that url doesn't show Obama spent 3 trillion dollars.

You're attempt is a complete fail.. that's sad.

Again you said "spent" and I never said "spent"
Lie lie lie thats all you do, I said "amassed a debt of 3 trillion in 2 years".

Oh and by the way that 3 trillion could have paid for the Iraq and Afghan wars... 3 times over.

Idiot... he didn't create, spend, build, budget, amass, gather, setup or create the 3 trillion dollars in debt.

He did, correct it though. To show you the truth. Respect it!