Piezoe's Queen opens her mouth - proves she deserves Fed Chair

Wow, what happened in 2008/2009 to cause such a decline in employment!?

The point, that you missed, is while the fed has been able to reinflate asset prices, all of this quantitative easing hs had zero effect on employment. They shouldnt be basing rate decisions on their desire for full employment.
 
The point, that you missed, is while the fed has been able to reinflate asset prices, all of this quantitative easing hs had zero effect on employment. They shouldnt be basing rate decisions on their desire for full employment.

You cannot say "zero" effect for at least two reasons. One, what would unemployment be without monetary stimulus? Two, the LFPR includes retirees.
 
You cannot say "zero" effect for at least two reasons. One, what would unemployment be without monetary stimulus? Two, the LFPR includes retirees.


Ahhhhhh the old keynesian fail safe, when the stimulus showed zero difference in the monthly jobs numbers, a complete failure, its always.... "yeah it might not have done much but it would have been worse without it"

Always hypotheticals when the real numbers prove you wrong time and time again.
 
Ahhhhhh the old keynesian fail safe, when the stimulus showed zero difference in the monthly jobs numbers, a complete failure, its always.... "yeah it might not have done much but it would have been worse without it"

Always hypotheticals when the real numbers prove you wrong time and time again.

No worse an assumption than the opposite one, which you're making.

Government spending can and does create jobs.
 
You mean during the Republican watch? I remember reading something about that. We had to bail out the banks or else the world would come to an end. Or something.


Oh yeah.....something about a poorly regulated Wall St and shadow banking system? Just as the righties favor?
 
No worse an assumption than the opposite one, which you're making.

Government spending can and does create jobs.

Actually according to the CBO this is the year when the stimulus starts costing us jobs. There was zero multiplier on the money we pissed away, and all it did was give state and local governments a couple more months until they inevitably had to cut back.
 
That would depend on the objective. If the objective was the outcome displayed on your chart, then the strategy appears to have been successful.

The unstated objective, yes. To make the rich, richer. The problem is that pesky little dual mandate.
 
It's simple fact. Paulson and Bernanke proposed the bailout in September '08. The markets plunged in October. Obama didn't take office until the end of the following January.

Sorry, where was it that Jem said anything about the bailout?
 
You cannot say "zero" effect for at least two reasons. One, what would unemployment be without monetary stimulus?

Yeah, Max. Remember that chart of what would have happened if we didn't pass the stimulus act? Remember how bad it showed unemployment would have been? Er...oh, wait. Nevermind.

Two, the LFPR includes retirees.

As usual, you don't have a clue. The Labor Force Participation Rate does not include retirees.
 
Oh yeah.....something about a poorly regulated Wall St and shadow banking system? Just as the righties favor?

You might want to take note of how many democrats are on Wall Street's payroll, including the Financial Services Committee. You know, get some facts before you spout off again. Also, take a look at the great legislation that Dodd Frank is, and how all it did was serve Wall Street and the banks. Dodd and Frank, as you might recall, being the two democratic politicians for which it is named.
 
Back
Top