• Moderators, please send me a PM if you are unable to access mod permissions. Thanks, Habsy.

OT: American Politics

theREALkoreaboy said:
signs that the euro model is fundamentally broken, and even socialist governments realize it. from the economist:

"The decision by Peugeot-PSA, a loss-making carmaker, to shut its factory at Aulnay, the first closure of a French car plant for 20 years, and to shed 8,000 jobs across the country has rocked France. It has become an emblem both of the country’s competitiveness problem and of the new Socialist government’s relative powerlessness, despite its promises, to stop private-sector restructuring. Tough as it is for the workers concerned, the planned closure may have had at least one beneficial effect: to jolt the country into recognising that France is losing competitiveness and that the government needs to do something about it.

Over the past 12 years, a competitiveness gap has opened up between France and Germany, its biggest trading partner. This shows both in manufacturing unit-labour costs, which have risen by 28% in France since 2000, but only 8% in Germany, and in France’s declining share of extra-EU exports. A cross-border study of two chemicals firms by Henri Lagarde, a French businessman, points to part of the problem: the German company pays only 17% of its employees’ gross salaries in social charges, next to 38% for its French counterpart. A recent study of competitiveness ranked Germany in sixth place; France came 21st.

During the presidential election campaign earlier this year, competitiveness scarcely featured—either on the right or the left. Once elected, Mr Hollande gave Arnaud Montebourg, who wrote a best-seller calling for “deglobalisation”, a ministerial job designed to stop industrial closures. Mr Montebourg has duly toured the country promising the impossible.

This autumn, however, as factory closures mount, a creeping sense of reality seems to be setting in. Mr Hollande may still be bent on his new 75% top tax rate, yet on other matters the tone has changed. Not only has the Aulnay closure been accepted, but Mr Hollande has talked of “painful” efforts ahead. He warned about €10 billion ($13 billion) of spending cuts, as well as €20 billion of tax increases, in the 2013 budget. Above all, he called for a “reform of the labour market”—traditionally a taboo for the left.

Mr Montebourg may still denounce the “greed of the financial system”, but other ministers, notably Pierre Moscovici, the finance minister, and Michel Sapin, the labour minister, sound more reasonable. “We want to be sensibly pro-business,” says Mr Moscovici. “We are very conscious that our economy won’t perform without our companies.” Advisers recognise that labour costs too much and that the level of public spending—at 56% of GDP the second-highest in the European Union—is a problem for France."
Click to expand...

Heh.
 
zeke said:
pathetic.

the unemployment rate is 7.8%.

the truth is, the unemployment rate was over-rated the last few months.
Click to expand...

Was it now? So most economists claim the numbers are off and understated but you have it on certainty they've been overrated? Credibility zero man.
 
Re: OT: Canadian Politics

KB, admit it, your argument is beyond weak.

It boils down to you saying "years have collective bargaining has gotten us here" and that any suggestion that cutbacks need to be made is little more than teacher hating.

It's weak, it's garbage, and it isn't rooted in economics. It's NIMBY, hypocritical nonsense.

A pay freeze will do virtually nothing but create some short term relief. Long term you guys need to take a massive paycut (I don't support) or a pension overhaul (which I do).
 
theREALkoreaboy said:
the sheer volume of smoke and the force of those arguments call the unemployment numbers very, very much into question. rush limbaugh called this at the beginning of this year too. right on cue, hopeychange's labour dept. put out highly questionable, favourable job numbers. i think people are smart enough to see how this went down.
Click to expand...

I do not think Obama would ever even risk playing with any numbers. Why should he when he is leading the polls? Are the numbers wrong? yes. Did Obama or his campaign specifically ensure it? Highly doubtful to no. If you want to pump conspiracy then you might be able to say an overzealous surrogate asked the wrong questions during the survey and that is even stretching it a mile.
 
msun30 said:
in any event, it's hilarious watching these fox news ****tards scramble to try and downplay this good news. pathetic, really.
Click to expand...

If you are referring to the unemployment numbers, almost all news outlets are questioning the data. CNN, MSNBC, NY Times, Bloomberg, CNBC, yes FOX, Independent Foundations, Heritage Club... the list goes on and on.
 
Habsy said:
If you are referring to the unemployment numbers, almost all news outlets are questioning the data. CNN, MSNBC, NY Times, Bloomberg, CNBC, yes FOX, Independent Foundations, Heritage Club... the list goes on and on.
Click to expand...

Yes, and every outlet I have seen has clearly shown how highly unlikely the numbers were adjusted to suit one candidate or the other.
 
Lotusland said:
Yes, and every outlet I have seen has clearly shown how highly unlikely the numbers were adjusted to suit one candidate or the other.
Click to expand...

I agree with that. The point is not whether or not the numbers were deliberately rigged or changed... the point is the numbers are flawed, period.
 
Habsy said:
I agree with that. The point is not whether or not the numbers were deliberately rigged or changed... the point is the numbers are flawed, period.
Click to expand...

Beyond dispute. A lot of it is guesswork based on models (such as birth and death projections). That's why they are always revising the numbers for previous months.
 
Habsy said:
I agree with that. The point is not whether or not the numbers were deliberately rigged or changed... the point is the numbers are flawed, period.
Click to expand...

I agree, which is why the correction should take place in the final report before the election and most likely hurt Obama more if this current report was the anomoly that takes place every few months.
 
CH1 said:
Beyond dispute. A lot of it is guesswork based on models (such as birth and death projections). That's why they are always revising the numbers for previous months.
Click to expand...

The problem with these past numbers is that they are so blatantly flawed the conspiracy theorists are out in force. The assumptions made on these numbers are ridiculous and assume the economy is the best it has been in 30 years, even better than under Clinton. Ludicrous.
 
Habsy said:
The problem with these past numbers is that they are so blatantly flawed the conspiracy theorists are out in force. The assumptions made on these numbers are ridiculous and assume the economy is the best it has been in 30 years, even better than under Clinton. Ludicrous.
Click to expand...

How so? All the employment numbers including the unemployment rate was much better under Clinton. As for the numbers being ludicrous, I used to trade stocks 10 yrs ago and everyone in the financial media knew the numbers were meaningless. I'm surprised it's taken the mainstream equivalent 10 yrs to catch on.
 
In order to have the drop displayed the GDP would have had to increase 5%, which it didn't. When factoring in GDP and the 892K new jobs the result would be an economy stronger than it has been in 30 years. It obviously isn't. This is why so many people are questioning the numbers, they are disgustingly wrong. Someone ****ed up badly. There is a reason the UC6 didn't move, nothing positive happened to make it move. The UC3, which is the number everyone touts, moved downward despite only 114k jobs reported. The home survey purportedly raised the jobs number by 892K. A ridiculous amount. Using this number and other assumptions they came out with a 7.8% figure. It's crap. This may actually hurt Obama more than help him if it is adjusted upward just before election.
 
If you say so. I really don't think these numbers move voters. If I'm unemployed in an underwater home and I see most of my pals struggling financially, I'm not going to change my vote because some bureaucrat said the rate dipped to 7.8 from 8.1. This is a lot of misplaced outrage, IMO.
 
BTW, I do think the economy will pick up soon. Bernanke printed so many dollars...they're running out of places to hide.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top