White House: Unemployment at 9% until 2012

[Amerigo Vespucci]

Source: CNN

NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) -- The White House said Friday it expects that unemployment will stay at or above 9% until 2012, but at the same time forecast that the economy will grow by at least 4% in 2011 and 2012.

It also revised its long-term deficit estimate under President Obama's proposed 2011 budget: The administration now believes the 10-year deficit will be $58 billion less than projected in February when the budget blueprint was first released.

Under the revised estimates, Uncle Sam will ring up $8.474 trillion in deficits between 2011 and 2020, down from the $8.532 trillion estimated in February.

In the near-term, the administration expects the 2010 deficit to come in at $1.47 trillion -- slightly lower than originally forecast and slightly above last year's deficit of $1.41 trillion. Meanwhile, the 2011 and 2012 deficits will come in somewhat higher than the White House forecast in February.

Read more: http://money.cnn.com/2010/07/23/news/economy/white_house_budget_review/index.htm?hpt=T1

[DJ13]

1. Lets hear it for mediocrity!

[Psephos]

21. That's not anywhere good enough to be mediocre. n/t

[DCBob]

2. i think this is a "setting the bar low" situation..

but they might be correct.. unfortunately.

[customerserviceguy]

13. I think the deficit figure is lowballing it, too

Interest rates are at one of the lowest troughs they've ever seen. Even if we return to the interest rates of the Fifties or Sixties, those deficit figures will balloon like crazy. If we hit even briefly the heights from 1980, we're completely and utterly cooked.

[jtuck004]

3. That's likely optimistic. It may not be under 9% till out near 2015.

They didn't happen to release a plan that would put people back to work did they? Like in some industries that would provide some jobs so people can pay for the homes they have, say capital-intensive manufacturing in chemicals or solar, something suitable for the 21st century. And for those that are entering the workforce every month?

If this didn't hit anyone, it means millions of unemployed people in our workforce of about 154 million people have worked their last job. Forever.

I should add that this is just a reading of the history of job creation, during Clinton's administration and Bush, and now Obama.

Facts are we need 125,00 permanent, full-time non-government (and mostly non-health care) jobs that pay decent wages every month just to stay even. If we want to drop the unemployment rate in any acceptable length of time we need 250,00 each month. The only time we exceeded that this year was with temporary Census jobs, and nearly all of those folks have been laid off.

We beat 250K/mo average in 1999, and that was with hiring for the Y2K overhaul. We haven't done that many jobs in the past 10 years, and the recession didn't start until 2007.

I was looking at some other stuff, and it looks like the CBO numbers this latest estimate came from shows an assumption of one year of 260,000 jobs in 2012 to get to this figure. Highly unlikely.

Some numbers to estimate with, for those interested. We created about 83,000 private jobs in June. If we suddenly, somehow starting in July created 250,000 private non-government jobs each month, it would take us 60 months, until 2015 to employ the unemployed today. That assumes no new people enter the job market, and doesn't reduce the ranks of the underemployed who want to work full-time but cannot find that employment.

I'm not trying to be gloomy. Rather, people need to be aware that creating that many jobs is highly unlikely. We need a plan, and some government investment of taxes directed to this purpose for our country.

[MichiganVote]

4. Obviously haven't set foot in Michigan lately

[jtuck004]

5. They are doing some good things - that battery plant is a great idea. n/t

[MichiganVote]

6. The white house was not responsible for that. Yes there was an Obama visit but it was not

and has not been a WH thing.

[jtuck004]

7. I know. I just think we need things like that. Say another 10,000 of them.

We really, really need some manufacturing to revive in this country. Electric cars, solar and alternative energy, chemical,
transportation (maglev trains?), tool and die manfacturing...

[Psephos]

22. Yes, the Korean corporation that owns the plant is indeed grateful.

However, thousands of stressed-out Michigan businesses that are receiving squat are less grateful.

Meanwhile, workers are getting $50K jobs at a cost to the Treasury over $500K per job.

Not so great an idea, imo.

[jtuck004]

30. I agree with you, but maybe this is a way we can reclaim some

manufacturing expertise. We need major capital investment, perhaps as much or more than the $15 trillion so are set aside
to insure that Government Goldman Sachs and others could continue their reckless behavior, to rebuild and
retool manufacturing.

Since American businesses and/or those who hold the taxpayer's money in trust don't seem to be willing to invest enough in
our country to create good-paying sustainable jobs, maybe we can grow some from the expertise that will be gained as foreign
companies invest here.

Because Michigan and Ohio's unemployment rates are 13.7 and 10.7, respectively, we must do something. And even though it
needs be much, much more, we have to start somewhere.

[OhioChick]

8. Or in Ohio n/t

[RamboLiberal]

9. I wonder if this isn't a permanent condition

Outsourcing so many jobs. Lack of manufacturing jobs and any other job that can done in other nations cheaper. Raising retirement ages. People being forced to work till they drag the dead body out of Wal-Mart.

[MichiganVote]

19. Yup. And then take away the social services network, social security, its all one

big goddamn scam. The United State of Kmart no matter who is in office. A pile of millionaires in congress, what the hell do they care.

[defendandprotect]

26. Unless Democrats begin doing something about it, it will be . .. end these fake wars --

overturn trade agreements -- that has to be two of the most urgent things to be done!

[Name removed]

10. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[SILVER__FOX52]

11. Well, it will be awhile before the President..............

can clear away the train wreck that was the bush Presidency. The bush recession will take some time to recover from.

[Hydra]

12. It would help if he started doing some of the clearing away, wouldn't it?

I'll be waiting patiently.

[underpants]

14. SMart move- set the game anything better is a gain

the press of course will not play it that way

[amandabeech]

15. He went after health care, cap and trade (well, in the house) and financial reform.

He promised to do all those during the campaign.

He even put together a huge stimulus bill that included far too many tax cuts and far too many pet projects.

The economy is still the humungo elephant in the room, and it appears that no one in the White House is prepared to really do anything about it.

What is Obama pushing now? A trade agreement with South Korea so that we plebes can enjoy yet another Perot-like sucking sound.

This is simply unsatisfactory in today's world of insourcing and outsourcing.

I'm 55 with good academics, including a very respectable J.D. However, my life has taken some bad turns, many of which were out of my control.

And now, I'm just done and waiting for Obama and the Cat Food Commission to take away my hope of retiring with dignity and health care at some point in the future.

I know that I'll shuffle off the polls this November and in 2012, but I'm not expecting anything any more than the defeat of some idiots who want to turn Iran into glass and repeal the civil rights act.

But that doesn't get me anywhere close to what I had 5 years ago.

What's the phrase? "Are you better off now than you were 4 years ago?

For me, the answer is likely to be, "Absolutely not."

[Lost4words]

17. It does not help but there are so many of us today, Im 56

and my story is much the same.

[amandabeech]

18. We're invisible to Washington.

We weren't the focus of the campaign, and we're expected to take the hit for Bush's deficit when we're a little older.

No one will hire us, and I'm not seeing Congress take up amendments to the Age Discrimination in Employment Act so that maybe some employers will think twice before throwing out our resumes.

A lot of us have been hit by insourcing and outsourcing, too, although that's not my main problem.

We really need a special interest group for those of us over 50 who still can and must work. I'm not much of an organizer, but someone out there must be.

[nightrain]

16. unacceptable

[paulk]

20. that's not going to work

especially since the real rate is around 16%.

these guys need a better plan than this or they're going to have riots in the streets.

how 'bout a new wpa, ccc?

[lovuian]

23. thats a Depression folks

and that means we need to get these people jobs

[Amerigo Vespucci]

27. Paul Krugman's June 27th NYT Op-Ed, "The Third Depression"

Op-Ed Columnist
The Third Depression
By PAUL KRUGMAN
Published: June 27, 2010

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/28/opinion/28krugman.html?_r=1&dbk

Recessions are common; depressions are rare. As far as I can tell, there were only two eras in economic history that were widely described as “depressions” at the time: the years of deflation and instability that followed the Panic of 1873 and the years of mass unemployment that followed the financial crisis of 1929-31.

Neither the Long Depression of the 19th century nor the Great Depression of the 20th was an era of nonstop decline — on the contrary, both included periods when the economy grew. But these episodes of improvement were never enough to undo the damage from the initial slump, and were followed by relapses.

We are now, I fear, in the early stages of a third depression. It will probably look more like the Long Depression than the much more severe Great Depression. But the cost — to the world economy and, above all, to the millions of lives blighted by the absence of jobs — will nonetheless be immense.

And this third depression will be primarily a failure of policy. Around the world — most recently at last weekend’s deeply discouraging G-20 meeting — governments are obsessing about inflation when the real threat is deflation, preaching the need for belt-tightening when the real problem is inadequate spending.

[defendandprotect]

24. We need to begin to amend and/or overturn the trade agreements . . .

let's hit at the cause of this unemployment disaster --

and, keep in mind, everytime we buy something that is imported we are securing

the future of another country -- large mega-corporations --

and burying ourselves!!

[defendandprotect]

25. Think this is looking more and more like a depression . . . and unemployment is much higher

than 9% -- there are places where it's 40% --

and what about the AA community? --

And what about the long term unemployed and underemployed --

figure is more like 17% -- and much higher than 14 million unemployed --

We need more movement on this issue -- and more funds coming into Treasury --

CUT THESE WARS, CUT THE MIC -- and OVERTURN THE REAGAN TAX CUTS FOR RICH, AS WELL!!

[Lorien]

29. Amen sister. And many of my friends and I have taken a 50% pay cut

nearly every freelancer I know has had to cut their prices by 40% or more. Many in house salaries have been slashed by as much, while corporate profits remain high. Some people I know now have to borrow from family just to keep the lights on and a roof over their heads, but they certainly aren't counted among the "unemployed". I think that if you counted all of those who were once middle class and who are now barely scraping by the figures would look far, far uglier.

[defendandprotect]

31. Depression more fits what you are describing . . . .

Wow!

I think we've come to the end of any stimulation from the stimulus --

long ago -- and things are pretty dire. Obama has to get busy on acknowledging

all of this and getting help out there --

Meanwhile, I think we liberals/progressives have to keep getting louder --

and I'm going to try to catch up with some of the in the street events!!

[moksha]

28. That will translate to one-term for President Obama.

[BillH76]

32. Their excuse will be that unemployment is a "lagging indicator"...

But if it lags long enough, it will bring the economy down with it.

[U4ikLefty]

33. So now you want the employment pony from Obama?

Geez, when will the "ME ME ME" crap stop with you people?

Look, as long as Obama is employed...everything is good. He gave you babies more than you deserve...more than FDR could dream of.

Rah-rah-rah!!!

:sarcasm:

[Zavulon]

34. And it will drop sharply just before Election Day, I suppose.

I remember biden telling us that if we didn't pass the so-called "stimulus," unemployment could go as high as - GASP! - EIGHT PERCENT!

The White House hasn't gotten anything right in terms of predicting unemployment (not to mention their ridiculous "created or saved" job estimates), so I would think it'll be well above 9% for a long while. The Republican sellout-to-insurance-companies health care "plan" has already cost me any chance of me getting my most recent job back, and I can't imagine a lot of employers screaming for new hires with the "plan" hanging over their heads.

[Zhade]

35. Uh, yeah, it's not at 9%. Fuckers.

I really, REALLY hate being lied to.