• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every persons position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Recession Ended in June 2009

Deuce

Outer space potato man
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 6, 2010
Messages
75,042
Reaction score
32,892
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
It fits the definition of a recession, but it does not imply that we've actually recovered fully.

So, yes, I agree with this analysis from a textbook-definition standpoint. I don't think you'll find anyone arguing that everything is just peachy.
 

ptif219

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 15, 2009
Messages
13,156
Reaction score
1,038
Location
melbourne florida
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
It fits the definition of a recession, but it does not imply that we've actually recovered fully.

So, yes, I agree with this analysis from a textbook-definition standpoint. I don't think you'll find anyone arguing that everything is just peachy.
As a truck driver I know frieght improved since april. That means we may level off. I believe you will not see hiring until companies know how taxes and helthcare will affect their profits.
 

buck

DP Veteran
Joined
May 29, 2009
Messages
11,241
Reaction score
4,741
Location
USA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Do you agree?

Recession Ended in June 2009 - Real Time Economics - WSJ

The National Bureau of Economic Research, the arbiter of the start and end dates of a recession, determined that the recession that began in December 2007 ended in June 2009.
Yes, we exited the recession. I ony wonder when (some might say if) we entered the double dip. We'll have to wait for NBER to set that date, and I think obama's policies hastened us to the probable double.
 
Last edited:

Boo Radley

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 20, 2009
Messages
37,066
Reaction score
7,028
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
As a truck driver I know frieght improved since april. That means we may level off. I believe you will not see hiring until companies know how taxes and helthcare will affect their profits.
I don't think those factor in at all. There is no evidence taxes effect hiring in any way that I have found, and health care has been a problem before reform. Nothing done should effect employment at all, though a public option might have actually helped companies.
 

ptif219

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 15, 2009
Messages
13,156
Reaction score
1,038
Location
melbourne florida
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
I don't think those factor in at all. There is no evidence taxes effect hiring in any way that I have found, and health care has been a problem before reform. Nothing done should effect employment at all, though a public option might have actually helped companies.
Wrong these are new expenses and companies in this economy will not hire until they know how much Obama is costing them
 

Barbbtx

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 7, 2010
Messages
8,467
Reaction score
1,993
Location
W'Ford TX
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Conservative
I don't think those factor in at all. There is no evidence taxes effect hiring in any way that I have found, and health care has been a problem before reform. Nothing done should effect employment at all, though a public option might have actually helped companies.
It's all the uncertainty of what taxes will be and what the HC bill will do to small/large businesses.
 

danarhea

Slayer of the DP Newsbot
DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 27, 2005
Messages
43,603
Reaction score
26,254
Location
Houston, TX
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Do you agree?

Recession Ended in June 2009 - Real Time Economics - WSJ

The National Bureau of Economic Research, the arbiter of the start and end dates of a recession, determined that the recession that began in December 2007 ended in June 2009.
I can answer this question, but it is in 2 parts.

1) Yes, according to all the economic indicators, the recession is over. When it ended, Obama had only been in office for 6 months. He should get a little of the credit, but the majority of the credit has to go to what Bush did during his last 6 months or so in office.

2) Yes, the recession is over, but that does not mean that we have recovered, nor does it mean a robust economy. That is going to take a lot of hard work, over a lot of years to happen. Don't forget that, when the crash hit in 1929, the market did not make it back to it's pre-crash level until 1953. If we recover, it is going to take a very long time. Being impatient won't help.

3) I know, I know, I said two parts, but the following thought just occurred to me - The derivatives bubble is still out there, and when it bursts, it will make the other bubbles look like a walk in the park. I believe that things are going to get much worse before they get better.
 

Renae

DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 26, 2007
Messages
48,389
Reaction score
18,084
Location
San Antonio Texas
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Conservative
Wrong these are new expenses and companies in this economy will not hire until they know how much Obama is costing them
Boo doesn't live in a world of Businesses and Reality, just liberal Ideology. Of course Businesses of all stripes are holding down, and prepping for the worst, uncertain as to what and how much Obama's Machinations will cost them, but Boo isn't allowed to think about that...
 

ZGM

Member
Joined
Jan 19, 2010
Messages
122
Reaction score
7
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
It fits the definition of a recession, but it does not imply that we've actually recovered fully.

So, yes, I agree with this analysis from a textbook-definition standpoint. I don't think you'll find anyone arguing that everything is just peachy.
If the recession is indeed over, then this whole jobless riff-raff is definitely an illusion IMHO.
 
Last edited:

Boo Radley

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 20, 2009
Messages
37,066
Reaction score
7,028
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
It's all the uncertainty of what taxes will be and what the HC bill will do to small/large businesses.
Again, I don't think it is anything of the kind. Business always has to deal with uncertainty. This is nothing new. And if people were spending, they jump right out even if you told them taxes might double.
 

Boo Radley

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 20, 2009
Messages
37,066
Reaction score
7,028
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
Wrong these are new expenses and companies in this economy will not hire until they know how much Obama is costing them
Nope. As soon as they know people are spending, they'll hire just fine. there is no evidence to support your claim at all.
 

buck

DP Veteran
Joined
May 29, 2009
Messages
11,241
Reaction score
4,741
Location
USA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
No evidence at all?

Emerson
Emerson Electric Co. (EMR) Chief Executive Officer David Farr said the U.S. government is hurting manufacturers with regulation and taxes and his company will continue to focus on growth overseas.
“Washington is doing everything in their manpower, capability, to destroy U.S. manufacturing,” Farr said today in Chicago at a Baird Industrial Outlook conference. “Cap and trade, medical reform, labor rules.”
Darn it. There was some evidence after-all.

BTW, before you just dismiss the reality of the situation, there are many CEO's that have recently come out and said similar (more couched perhaps) things.
 

Kushinator

I'm not-low all the time
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 2, 2006
Messages
20,418
Reaction score
8,014
Location
lincoln park
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Wrong these are new expenses and companies in this economy will not hire until they know how much Obama is costing them
This is not how (most) business operates; under the premise of "waiting" for tax policy to be implemented. I stress the word most because future tax policy is an integral part for hedge funds and various private trusts.

Unless of course the actions since 2000 (when surpluses turned into massive deficits) did not send the signal to all businesses that tax increases are necessary requisites for future deficit reduction. If you or anyone was in business during this time, i have a hard time believing that you were both competent and not expecting tax increases in the wake of trillions upon trillions of added debt.

My :twocents:
 

Kushinator

I'm not-low all the time
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 2, 2006
Messages
20,418
Reaction score
8,014
Location
lincoln park
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
No evidence at all?

Emerson


Darn it. There was some evidence after-all.

BTW, before you just dismiss the reality of the situation, there are many CEO's that have recently come out and said similar (more couched perhaps) things.
Where was all this outrage during an era of "deficits do not matter"? There was little if any. These companies were all too happy to take their profits at the expense of increased future tax liabilities. Sorry to say, but this type of whining falls upon deaf ears (if of course you are intellectually honest).
 

Boo Radley

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 20, 2009
Messages
37,066
Reaction score
7,028
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
No evidence at all?

Emerson


Darn it. There was some evidence after-all.

BTW, before you just dismiss the reality of the situation, there are many CEO's that have recently come out and said similar (more couched perhaps) things.
No, I wouldn't call that confirming evidence. It is merely someone using this as an excuse. When I speak of evidence, i'm talking about evidence that business doesn't hire due to taxes, historically. ;)

BTW, how was amnufactoring doing before Obama? Before anything on taxes?
 

buck

DP Veteran
Joined
May 29, 2009
Messages
11,241
Reaction score
4,741
Location
USA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Where was all this outrage during an era of "deficits do not matter"? There was little if any. These companies were all too happy to take their profits at the expense of increased future tax liabilities. Sorry to say, but this type of whining falls upon deaf ears (if of course you are intellectually honest).
The fact is that the CEO of a company is flat out telling you that he will not be hiring in America due to the legislation that, in his views, hurts business. You can ignore it, pretend it doesn't exsit, and believe that he should have had the same sentiment during the last administration, but there it is.

Here's from the Intel CEO.

Intel chief: Obama (still) driving US off cliff ? The Register

Last year, he complained that "The thing that is most difficult as a businessperson when looking at large investments ... is 'what are the variables?' And there's just so many variables today on every front." He defined variables at that time as "cost of energy, cost of health care, tax rates, R&D credits, you name it."
I guess instead of listening to the people that actually create the jobs, we can just listen to Boo and obama.
 

hazlnut

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 27, 2009
Messages
11,963
Reaction score
3,543
Location
Naperville, IL
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
Wrong these are new expenses and companies in this economy will not hire until they know how much Obama is costing them
Wrong, the corporate tax structure will remain as it always does... they don't really pay taxes. And states can now regulate inappropriate rises in health care costs.

You are sadly misinformed about a great number of things.
 

Kushinator

I'm not-low all the time
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 2, 2006
Messages
20,418
Reaction score
8,014
Location
lincoln park
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
The fact is that the CEO of a company is flat out telling you that he will not be hiring in America due to the legislation that, in his views, hurts business. You can ignore it, pretend it doesn't exsit, and believe that he should have had the same sentiment during the last administration, but there it is.

Here's from the Intel CEO.

Intel chief: Obama (still) driving US off cliff ? The Register

I guess instead of listening to the people that actually create the jobs, we can just listen to Boo and obama.
Wow....

Who could have... would have thought; large corporations are making comments that express their desire for lower taxes.

My question to you is: Why was intel able to secure hefty profits during an era of higher taxes (1994-2000)? What was the difference between then and now?
 

buck

DP Veteran
Joined
May 29, 2009
Messages
11,241
Reaction score
4,741
Location
USA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Wow....

Who could have... would have thought; large corporations are making comments that express their desire for lower taxes.

My question to you is: Why was intel able to secure hefty profits during an era of higher taxes (1994-2000)? What was the difference between then and now?
Do you really not see any differences in the number of uncertanties between then and now? Paul Otellini of Intel named them... Health care costs... Cap and trade... new regulations...

Their comments (and many other CEO's have made similar comments) make it clear that due to the current enviroment and uncertainty, they will increase hiring and expansion to other countries. To assume, as Boo does, that this will not hurt hiring in America.. Wow...
 

Boo Radley

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 20, 2009
Messages
37,066
Reaction score
7,028
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
Fact is, manufactoring was in trouble in 2002. Who were they blaming then? And with tax cuts, why didn't manufactoring boom?
 

buck

DP Veteran
Joined
May 29, 2009
Messages
11,241
Reaction score
4,741
Location
USA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Fact is, manufactoring was in trouble in 2002. Who were they blaming then? And with tax cuts, why didn't manufactoring boom?
They were blaming outsourcing, which was accurate. The CEO's are saying that they see a potential cap and trade policy, health care reform, regulations, etc increasing the cost of doing business. So, they are going to increase their efforts to hire outside of the country where the enviroment is more business friendly. They don't want to make large investments at home.

Currently, there are many jobs that are not particuarly beneficial to outsource (from a cost benefit perspective). As costs continue to increase at home - due to the previously mentioned items - that entire metric can change. While the job may not have been cost effective to outsource, it now is.

You can see the same thing happening between states. As the cost of doing business in the state increases (due to taxes, etc) companies become more likely to move to a different state.
 

Kushinator

I'm not-low all the time
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 2, 2006
Messages
20,418
Reaction score
8,014
Location
lincoln park
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Do you really not see any differences in the number of uncertanties between then and now? Paul Otellini of Intel named them... Health care costs... Cap and trade... new regulations...
Of course. They were not forced to internalize future tax increases as the US budget was in good shape at that time. However health care costs were subsidized to a great extent, all the while inflation within that particular sector was near double digits; yet this was not an issue of spilling over to taxpayers because the US surplus was set to reduce the national debt in the tune of trillions of dollars.

Their comments (and many other CEO's have made similar comments) make it clear that due to the current enviroment and uncertainty, they will increase hiring and expansion to other countries. To assume, as Boo does, that this will not hurt hiring in America.. Wow...
As was the same partisan hackery when the FDIC (they claimed it would end private enterprise) was established, medicare was introduced (they claimed we were becoming socialists), and when FDA/SEC regulations (they claimed that it would force costs to skyrocket) were put in place. Hmmmm.

How did that all work out?
 

Kushinator

I'm not-low all the time
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 2, 2006
Messages
20,418
Reaction score
8,014
Location
lincoln park
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
They were blaming outsourcing, which was accurate. The CEO's are saying that they see a potential cap and trade policy, health care reform, regulations, etc increasing the cost of doing business. So, they are going to increase their efforts to hire outside of the country where the enviroment is more business friendly. They don't want to make large investments at home.

Currently, there are many jobs that are not particuarly beneficial to outsource (from a cost benefit perspective). As costs continue to increase at home - due to the previously mentioned items - that entire metric can change. While the job may not have been cost effective to outsource, it now is.

You can see the same thing happening between states. As the cost of doing business in the state increases (due to taxes, etc) companies become more likely to move to a different state.
Are you infering that we should lower our standards so to re-establish a labor comparative advantage during a time when our capital comparative advantage provides a greater positive long term growth outlook? Great idea; strive to be like China (who is striving to be like us).
 
Top Bottom