Unemployment hits 10.2%

So maybe that stimulus handout didn’t work.

One thing’s for certain, as more and more Americans are looking at pink slips, fewer will believe their America was saved by Obama.

Now we have to go all the way back to 1983 to see unemployment rates like this one. (That was typed with a little sarcasm. I hope you sensed it.) In our on-again-off-again leadership team at the White House, you can expect today’s news to be proof of the need for another stimulus package. Keep in mind, numbers just a few days ago were proof the last stimulus package worked.

My take? The Main Dude doesn’t have a clue what’s going on. He’ll react in perpetual-campaign mode instead of the presidential leader as he’s already been elected. Watch for it.

I lost a friend over all this Obama baloney. One of the discussions I remember having with her was the “threat of unemployment” discussion back when Obama was campaigning a year ago. By God, we need to elect Obama or unemployment could be up to 10%! She was adamant only Obama and the policies of Democrats would save us.

We elected Obama. There are majorities in both houses for the Democrats. Unemployment is over 10%.

Do the Dems have a plan B? Plan A – bash Bush – is losing its legitimacy.


  1. bondwooley, it was nice spam, but it was still spam. I pulled the comment and link.

  2. Randy in Richmond says:

    Remember the old saying that even a broken watch not running is right twice a day. I think of this quote most every time I read or hear a prediction by an economist or a long range weather predictor, neither of which has been very accurate lately.

    And you were right Cindy. I heard that Obama is going to (or already has) speak unscheduled about the new numbers. We can’t comprehend anything on our own-we need big brother to explain it to us. What I really wish he would explain is how he computes a job saved. On that one I do need some help.

  3. Your either employed or you are unemployed. How are you “saved?” Next year all of those so-called saved jobs will be terminated.

    And Cindy – you seem to be “saving” BNN lately. It’s like those old “Merrill Lynch Bullish on America” commercials – where people would whisper and turn their heads to listen. You’ve taken it over. You could type any headline and you are in the top.

    Sorry to be off topic, but I’ve been wanting to mention that subject to you.

  4. Must be a miss in the logarithm they are using. They’ve never been very reliable. (Either that or I’m a blogging goddess, and I doubt that’s the fact.)

  5. “So maybe that stimulus handout didn’t work.”

    It did. Exactly the way it was designed. With a small bump of a couple percentage points in GDP over Q3 & Q4 of 2009….tapering off therafter.

    Now that we’ve seen the Dems’ plan (small stimulus package not large enough to offset the collapse in aggragate demand), I would be interested in seeing the Republican alternative to the fallout from the financial crisis. What do you think they would offer us with a 10%+ unemployment rate and little or no possibility of the American consumer bailing them out by inflating their asset prices like last time?

  6. Randy, it depends on what economists you’re talking about. Guys like Bob Schiller, Nassim Taleb, Ken Rogoff and Paul Krugman have been right about the risks of mortgage securitization, the Fed. induced housing bubble, the pending financial crisis and also how to address the crisis after it finally happened.

    The neoclassical robots of the 1980’s have been the ones proved horribly wrong over the last year. The guys who thought we could tax cut and deregulate our way to prosperity.