Population 2,500.000
unemployment rate 20%
labor force participation rate 80%
How many people were unemployed in 2002 given those numberss?debt consolidation loan
Labor force participation rate is percent of population who want to work (labor force=labor force participation rate x population).
Unemployment rate is the portion of people who are in the labor foce but are unemployed (unemployed=labor force x unemployment rate).
Now just do the math.
So the stock market is doing so %26quot;wonderful%26quot; since the Feds cut the interest rate....why am I paying over $50 bucks every time I hit the gas pump? Why is the unemployment rate so high, and why I%26#039;m I still working a job I%26#039;m well-overqualified for....how is this going to %26quot;stimulate%26quot; us out of this recession if the stockholders profit and the working folks are pushed down further. If the Fed wants to increase sending, why don%26#039;t they bust out some %26quot;tax free%26quot; weekends so the single moms with 12 kids from 5 different men can buy all their kids some sneakers...how is making the rich richer going to help people land jobs, find work....and spend money if they are hurting to pay their bills? Companies are still going to be reserved to spend now because of the recent state of the economy...I foresee some trading, but that will subside and the whole plan will fall in on itself....
If Stock Market doing so great....why are we still paying $4 per gal of gas?title loans
Liberals and environmentalists have wanted $4 a gallon gas for YEARS.
The reason we%26#039;re paying this is because liberals and environmentalists won%26#039;t let us tap into our OWN oil supplies. Mount St. Helen%26#039;s did more environmental damage than any oil rig in the Gulf did when hit by three hurricanes.
I%26#039;d be willing to bet that, if we announced we were going to start using our own oil supplies, OPEC would drop the price of oil back to $40 a barrel.
If Stock Market doing so great....why are we still paying $4 per gal of gas?
loan
Hooterville U ?|||Those of us with stock in the oil companies are doing pretty well, thanks to people like you paying $4. per gallon. Our stock will do even better when you are paying $6. per gallon. If you want to take advantage of the great stock market, stop buying gas and buy more stock.
#2 The unemployment rate ina city is 5.8%. There are 23,200 people who are unemplyed and looking for work , How many people are not looking for work?
#3 Find the percent of the number mentally : 30 % of 30
#4 What percent of 120 is 24
#5 find 77% of 73
#6 17.05 is what percent of 31
#7 Nadia opened a savings account 3 years ago with $770.00 . her account has $885.50 now. What is the simple interest rate of her account?
#1 - juan weighs 185 pounds.water makes up 68% of his body weight. how much does the water in his body weigh?loan company
#1. It depends on whether or not Juan has peed recently.
#2. ALL of the lazy people are not looking for work.
#3. Ok, I did it mentally.
#4. 100%
#5. 100
#6. 100%
#7. I%26#039;m simply not interested anymore.
#1 - juan weighs 185 pounds.water makes up 68% of his body weight. how much does the water in his body weigh?
loan
Do your own homework!
Geez!|||1. 185 x .68
2. 23,200 x .942
do the rest yourself
During the administration of William Jefferson Clinton, the U.S. enjoyed more peace and economic well being than at any time in its history. He was the first Democratic president since Franklin D. Roosevelt to win a second term. He could point to the lowest unemployment rate in modern times, the lowest inflation in 30 years, the highest home ownership in the country%26#039;s history, dropping crime rates in many places, and reduced welfare rolls. He proposed the first balanced budget in decades and achieved a budget surplus. As part of a plan to celebrate the millennium in 2000, Clinton called for a great national initiative to end racial discrimination.How many of you it%26#039;s absolutly true and I agree with it too.
How many of you agree with me with following fact about Bill Clinton government?commericial loan
The Clintons were entirely responsible for the dot-com boom, but had no responsibility for its bust (and recession) as he left office.
They destroyed Al Qaeda after the 1990s WTC, US embassy, and USS Cole attacks. AQ could only rebound , retrain, and plan 911 after the Clintons left office.
Genocides in Africa didn%26#039;t really happen in the 1990s due to the Clintons timely intervention.
NAFTA stabilized and caused growth in US manufacturing. Walmart was filled with quality US made items.
The Iraq problem was solved by the Clintons.
The social Security fund was not raided to cause the appearance of a balanced budget. In fact the crisis was solved and SS was funded to 2100.
I love your fairy land.
I agree that Bush has not been a good president, but the %26quot;good old days%26quot; were not that good either and many of the causes of our current problems stem from the pre-Bush years.
How many of you agree with me with following fact about Bill Clinton government?
loan
I for one paid more taxes under clinton|||I agree with you totally.When Bill was president i was never worried about all the things i am now worried about.It was a peaceful time in my life %26amp; i thank him for that.|||i agree but he is not running is he|||Let%26#039;s see now. All those crazy loans that were begun and granted during his tenure and the job growth that resulted from all that false economic growth. And crime was affected by WHAT that he did? Don%26#039;t think there was any drop in welfare rolls. Any time there is growth, no matter how artificial (witness the growth during the Internet bubble) results in more taxes coming in, hence the illusion of budget surplus. He did some good things, no douobt, but not all you allege.|||I sure hope you don%26#039;t beleive this. when he left office the national debt was 5.6 trillion dollars. The budget has never been balanced since Madison was president. The economy was good because we were moving all the manufactoring out of America to foreign countries not realizing the downfall of it and it has caught up with us in the trickle down process of it. And we are paying for it now and blaming the wrong people because we only can see the present and not the past. This is the reaction of the ostrich people of America stick my head in the sand and don%26#039;t worry with it till it bites me!|||NOT ME BECAUSE IT IS NOT A FACT.
1. There was no peace.
Bosnia, Kosovo, Somalia, Waco, bombing of Iraq, Olympics bombing in Atlanta, Oklahoma Bombing, first WTC bombing, U.S. embassies in Kenya and Tanzania bombed, USS Cole bombed, churches burned across the South, Khobar towers bombing, abortion clinics bombed.
THAT%26#039;S PEACE ??????????
At the end of all of this he PARDONED members of the FALN terrorist group who set off more than 130 bombs in American cities between 1974-1983 killing and maiming hundreds.
2. The Republican Revolution led by Newt Gingrich in 1994 FORCED Big Pimpin Bill Clinton to accept a balanced budget and the Contract With America came from the same. THAT%26#039;S why the budget was balanced.
3. The unemployment rate is lower now than it was then. The economy actually rebounded in the 4th quarter of 1992 (check the stock reports. Google it) and the economy tanked during his last year in office when the tech bubble burst.
4. Big Pimpin Bill Clinton borrowed money from Social Security for his budget fostering , though not causing, the current crisis that system is having .
I have plenty of files on the Clinton Presidency and all of them are shameful examples of a corrupt liar and I don%26#039;t even have to bring Monica into it. The way they rented out the Lincoln Bedroom Filegate, Travel gate, whitewater, rape and MORE.
I will NEVER lie to myself by telling myself that Big Pimpin Bill Clinton was good for America
AND NO I AM NOT AND NEVER HAVE BEEN A REPUBLICAN !|||i agree 100% with you on that|||Cannot agree with you--- Clinton was only re-elected because Gingrich would not hold his position on the government shutdown and let Clinton get by with vetoing every bill that the congress sent to him---Clinton then co-opted the republicans own message that got so many new congressmen elected ----including balancing the budget and welfare to work and this got himself re-elected. When Gingrich gave up because of political expediency that was the end of the Republican Revolution. Bush promised to restore the republican promises to the nation that Gingrich had instituted and did just the opposite which is why he is held in such low esteem. Bush used the war to get what he wanted and has spent us into virtual bankruptcy. But Clinton was very lucky to be in office when the dot.com industry sprung up and caused more revenue to flow to the government which resulted in a surplus---abolutely nothing that he did as his own idea, but use Republican ideas.----and that is the rest of the story.--which can be found in %26quot;Rome Wasn%26#039;t Burnt In A Day%26quot; by Joe Scarborough( who was a congressman elected in 1994 and served till 2001 and fullfiled his promise of term limits when he was elected that he would not run for re-election again..|||Nice little delusion you%26#039;ve got going there.|||He was also impeached for lying about an affair with an intern young enough to be his daughter. Tell it like it really was; the good and the bad.|||Not me ----could not dis-agree more !
Iraq%26#039;s unemployment rate in 2005 was reported by the U.N. and the Iraqi government at 27%. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/con... Iraq%26#039;s inflation rate in 2005 was 40%. http://www.indexmundi.com/iraq/inflation...
Obviously Iraq%26#039;s economy is in tatters. Iraq has the world%26#039;s second largest proven oil reserves but it produces so little of the black stuff that it has to import oil. In the history of the world there has never been a lasting, free democracy without a middle class. The larger the middle class the greater the extent of democracy. So how exactly is democracy supposed to stick in Iraq? I didn%26#039;t even mention the lack of security and the fact that 100% of Iraqi security comes from coalition forces because Iraqi security forces will not stand on their own. I%26#039;m not calling for a pullout. I just want our presidential administration to admit that Iraq is a ******** mess. Neo-cons: rebuttal?
How is Iraq supposed to form a successful democracy?emergency loan
Democracy In Iraq? Do you really believe that our president is trying to establish a democracy in Iraq? Is this an after thought joke? So he is pushing for democracy since he could not find anything else to justify his invasion of Iraq? First of all, to have a democracy anywhere, the people should rule. Religion is the main aspect in Iraq. Iraqis, as mostly fanatic Muslims, are ruled by their religions (Sunnis Vs. Shiats Vs. Kurds). Their new constitution is partially based on the teachings of their Quran. Separation of power does not exist in Iraq as it is the main element of democracy. Freedom of anything is not in their book. Women have no right to do anything freely without consenting their men. They get killed over the Free of Speech or expressing their political views. Their PM, Mr. Al-Maliki is tied with Ayotollah of Iran (he kisses his hands for blessing once in a while..honestly). Al-Maliki supports terrorists Hezbollah and Iran and he is anti Israel. Bush and his Neocons know that Iraqis will never ever get rid of their religion and to be free thinkers. And now, USA will never be able to stabilize Iraq. Hatred among the various sects is so strong engraved in their souls for over a thousand of years (after the death of their prophet Muhamed). Do you still buy Bush%26#039;s Administration claim and believe that Democracy will be spread in Iraq? Suppose Democracy is established in Iraq by Bush, the next day after we leave, Iraqis will establish a new Theocracy for sure....guaranteed. Please...please don%26#039;t be gullible as I am sure you are smarter than what our president is claiming.
How is Iraq supposed to form a successful democracy? loanHey Sam, Thank you for making me think in more than the dimensions that I have been thinking! James in San Diego Report It
|||It is unlikely they will.|||As soon as the Radical Muslims in Iran are deafted by the USA and Israel. Which will happen sooner than you realize, True Democracy will thrive in the Middle East|||They%26#039;ll learn in those schools our Troops are painting. 100,7800 more schools and paint jobs to go and the war will be over. How quaint.|||Hey Bot,
I think I will be able to better answer your question as soon as the Unites States is able to form its own successful democracy.
Anything before then would just be a theory that I have read about in fiction books that are referred to as %26quot;History%26quot;.
I%26#039;ll let you know if we ever get there!
James in San Diego|||We built a powerful democracy in Japan at the end of WWII and they didnt start out with much of a Middle class either, and their country was in much worse shape than Iraq.
We built a successful democracy in Germany after WWII and they basically had no economy left.
and just FYI The Iraqis are providing much of their own security now.
heres just one example http://news.monstersandcritics.com/middl...
just remember we completely wiped out their military and disbanded Sadam鈥檚 police forces so we had to start from scratch. This isn鈥檛 play station where that happens overnight.|||If the people in Iraq immediately stopped thinking like Iraqis and then immediately started thinking like Americans then the war would be over - IMMEDIATELY.
If pigs could fly then...................................|||It might be useful to differentiate between an economy in the tank and the lack of a middle class. Like many conventional authoritarian states, Iraq in the Hussein era had a comparatively large middle class. The size of this middle class is comparable to many war-torn states in Latin America that have become fledgling democracies. Latin America also has had periods of 4 digit inflation.
That said, democracy is not easy. Many people play the cultural card with Iraq and many other countries in the Middle East. I think it is worth noting, however, that there was a time not long ago when it was thought that Catholic countries could not become democracies for a variety of reasons. Then the Catholic church began to promote liberation theology and things changed a bit. Just an observation. I hope that you are serious about the question and not just asking a question which you have already answered.
Take care.|||first of all Japan and Germany attack their nighbours country and both German and Japan army kill so many people in Europe
or in far east and these criminals in mined till Now . so when war is end both German and Japan people realize that war is bad and it is best to build their country in stead of kill destroy people
at Iraq case Iraq did not attack USA never ever and from 19 suicide how attack USA at 11Sep 2001 15 came from Suadia and the rest came from Lebanon Eygept UAE and NO ONE CAME FROM Iraq so here USA play the rule of Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan and Iraq people is the victim of this occupation how you believe that this is Democracy this is occupation and invasion by USA
How is real GDP affected in the US, by unemployment rate, inflation rate, and the federal fund rate? if one fluctuates does it have a direct affect on the other?
How is real GDP affected by...?tax credit
GDP has an affect on unemployment; rising GDP tends to reduce unemployment.
Rising GDP tends to cause a rise in the inflation rate (and vice versa).
Raising the federal funds rate tends to slow GDP growth (and vice versa).
i%26#039;m currently working on my economics project and im getting so fustrated with not finding the information i need. from the looks of it no one seems to know theres an economics board here anyway so, i figure your all smart and nice people i%26#039;ll ask here. i need to know the current statistics for, real and nominal GDP, united states population, per capita income, the unemployment rate, federal intrest rate and inflation rate. thank you so very much for taking the time out to help me with this.
I know this doesnt belong here but your all so nice and smart?credot siosse
me no smarticle or speakie any englash, so me no halp
I know this doesnt belong here but your all so nice and smart? loan
uhhh??|||This has nothing to do with pregnancy or parenting|||well, to get the truth, i suggest looking to the brits....if you want propaganda, you can see it on the dept of labor website|||go to teacherrus.com and then you look unda gdp i had to do it last month on a project id give it to ya but it is gettin graded srry|||What is GDP? Im sorry I know I dont know the answer but you are right one of these ladies will. Good luck|||this has nothing to do w/being smart... it%26#039;s about being knowledgeable in the specified field(s). Being smart and being knowledgeable are completely different. One can be the smartest person on Earth but may not know anything. One may be the dumbest person and know all s/he needs to know to survive and have a great life.
But in any case I can%26#039;t help you here
good luck|||go ta google and tis go nothin ta do wit parantin|||I would try:
Taxation Dept
Census
Wikepedia
Here are some links I googled:
http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/internationa...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Highest-inc...
http://www.census.gov/statab/ranks/rank2...|||if you google everything you asked, you will find all your answers. google is the answer to everything...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Per_capita_...
and this is the bureau of labor statistics for the US...
http://www.bls.gov/cps/|||fedstats.gov and census.gov
make sure you put .gov, not .com|||You can probably look it up on the internet. You know research.|||Okay:
Real GDP: 13.13 Trillion
Nominal GDP: 4.1 Trillion
US Population: 301 Million
Per Capita Income: $44,000
Unemployment: 4.4%
Federal Interest rate: 4.25%
Inflation Rate: 2.5%|||nominal GDP (millions of USD) United States 13,194,700.
For Per capita income I suggest you look here
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Personal_in...
as it more complicated than just one figure.
the population is over 300 million in America with one birth every 7 seconds and a death every 13 1 migrant every 31 seconds making that a gain of one person every 11 seconds.
There was an official measure of 6.8 million unemployed in the U.S. as of NOV 2007, a rate of 4.7%. If you want more exact figures go to http://www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/emps...
federal interest rate is currently at 4.75% though that can change month on month.|||Check the US Census.
From the website N.C. Rural Economic Development Center(http://www.ncruralcenter.org/databank/tr...
%26quot;Poverty rates increase after recession
The poverty rate in North Carolina increased from the 2000 level of 12.3 percent to 15.0 percent for 2002-2003. The recession and increasing unemployment rates in North Carolina are a likely cause of the increase in poverty. North Carolina had the third highest increase in poverty in 2002-2003 and was one of only 7 states that experienced an increase.%26quot;
And Edwards was the DIRECTOR of his %26quot;poverty%26quot; center and was paid OVER $250,000 last year to give SPEECHES about poverty, so HOW is it possible that his HOME STATE had an INCREASE in poverty?
Does THIS fact square with Edwards%26#039;s %26#039;poverty%26#039; initiatives and speeches?interest rate
He is the epitome of hypocrisy..The word was invented by him as the Internet was invented by Gore!!! Arrogance is his middle name!!
Does THIS fact square with Edwards%26#039;s %26#039;poverty%26#039; initiatives and speeches? loan
He was paid over $250,000 to make speeches about poverty? How much did he then donate to eradicating poverty? If it wasn%26#039;t a significant amount, then he is a hypocrite.
The majority of us will never see a year when we make $250,000.|||His home state had an increase in poverty because of the brief recession that followed the Fed%26#039;s 1999-2000 interest rate hikes and following 9-11.
The key point is the Fed raised rates faster and to a greater degree from 2004-2006 and still the expansion continues - because tax rates are lower.|||And how many people is he currently supporting through college?|||Maybe Bush can say he thinks %26quot;Eddie%26quot; is doing a terrific job on fighting poverty.|||I do not like that man he is creepy and obviously a liar
Hello there,
I was wondering if someone could please help me im having a small dilemma here i need to inturprut this graph information and answer the following questions:
1. Describe the pattern of Australia鈥檚 inflation rate between 1990 and 2006.
2. Describe the pattern of Australia鈥檚 unemployment rate between 1990 and 2006.
3. Describe the pattern of Australia鈥檚 economic growth rate between 1990 and 2006.
If someone could please help me to answers these questions...
Thanks alot, all help is greatly appreciated.
Economics, Graph Inturprutation?auto financing
Let me try:
1. Describe the pattern of Australia鈥檚 inflation rate between 1990 and 2006.
After being fairly high (5%-8% range) durin 1990-91, Australia%26#039;s inflation rate cam down sharply and remained relatively low and stable (around 2% for most of the years except in 1996 when it surged to 4%) but again suffered upward pressure since 2002 averaging about 2.5% till 2005 before finally rising sharply to 3.8% in 2006, that should have caused concern to macro-economy managers. (inflation rate for 2001 is missing in the chart).
2. Describe the pattern of Australia鈥檚 unemployment rate between 1990 and 2006.
Australia%26#039;s unemployment rate remained fairly high since 1990 ( close to 8% and rose above 10% above during 1991-94 and then fell to an average of 8.3% for the next four yesrs till 1998 when the economic growth rate remained strong, before consistently declining as economic growth weakened a little over the years to finally reach 4.9 % by 2006.
3. Describe the pattern of Australia鈥檚 economic growth rate between 1990 and 2006.
Australia%26#039;s economic growth rate show considerable fluctuation during the period 1999 to 2006. There was a sharp deceleration in growth rate from 3.66 % in 1990 to virtual zero growth in the next two years, after which the growth rate picked up to move in the range 3.5% - 4.7% but before declining again to around 3.25% for the next 4 years 2001 through 2004 before dipping to 2.75-2.8% in 2005 -06.
Myths About Immigration (http://www.justiceforimmigrants.org/myth...
Immigrants take jobs and opportunity away from Americans
?The largest wave of immigration to the U.S. since the early 1900s coincided with our lowest national unemployment rate and fastest economic growth. Immigrant entrepreneurs create jobs for U.S. and foreign workers, and foreign-born students allow many U.S. graduate programs to keep their doors open. While there has been no comprehensive study done of immigrant-owned businesses, we have countless examples: in Silicon Valley, companies begun by Chinese and Indian immigrants generated more than $19.5 billion in sales and nearly 73,000 jobs in 2000.
(Source: Richard Vedder, Lowell Gallaway, and Stephen Moore, Immigration and Unemployment: New Evidence, Alexis de Tocqueville Institution, Arlington, VA (Mar. 1994), p. 13.
Why don%26#039;t Americans know the following myth about immigration?annual credit report
three cheers for immigrants for realizing america%26#039;s dream...maybe americans can stop bitching and learn from them
Why don%26#039;t Americans know the following myth about immigration? loan
those are legal immigrants,big difference.|||yea there doing all the stuff that you dont wanna do, like cooking and gardening, which is really the thing that keeps the american economy going|||i love men|||because Americans don%26#039;t care and thats sad. they should but thinking what ever the T.V tells them is WAY more fun|||we know it we just don%26#039;t acknowledge it.|||Did you use to eat paint chips as a kid.|||link does not work is wedge issue to make people made at mexicans not haliburton sadly it works|||because that was 100 years ago. But you can get any tax payers attention on immigration by telling them immigrants get man govt. services for free|||why do u have a problem if there is immigrants. Mexicans just want a easy life for there childrens. and theres lots of teens geting involved in gangs. basicly there parents hoped the border for nothing. some shity *** world|||Because people like to speak out of the A.S.S. People who make assumptions are unintelligent. If you notice most of the time someone makes an accusation based on their opinion, they do not quote sources. All in all Americans need someone to blame. In the Southwest it is the Immigrants who are causing all the problems, in the east coast it%26#039;s the Latins and Blacks who cause the crime. In the South (Louisianna, Georgia, Alabama) it%26#039;s the Blacks who are taking up the welfare. I have heard them all and it just makes me think that the people who say this are uneducated and unintelligent plain and simple.|||Ignorance and indifference. most people don%26#039;t care about politics because
a) it%26#039;s too confusing
b) Too much criticsm and attacks back and forth.
c) they have their own agenda (we can understand that though)
My answer to this problem would be to make it easier for immigrants to get passport visas, where they are legal for a certain time period. In short, make it so immigrants would rather be legal than illegal. Or, draft them into the military, and if the background check doesn%26#039;t pass, put them to work in building jails, dams, skyscrapers, etc. and put them in as janitors for the rest. Then send them back over the border registering them so we know what to do if they try it again.|||I don%26#039;t want those americans in my country, they talk funny and smoke cigarettes and listen to rock n roll, send them back home to England I say|||Most Americans don%26#039;t have a problem with immigration as long as it is done legally. After September 11th, I dont think it is too much to ask that we know exactly who enters our country. There is no doubt that foreign workers can be an asset to the country, but to enter illegally and collect benefits paid by legal taxpayers should not be expected.|||It is not a myth. illegal immigrants do take jobs from Americans.there have been plenty of jobs made by businesses started by legal immigrants that is the difference|||Maybe because it%26#039;s NOT a myth as you would have us believe.|||Legal immigration is a good thing for the US economy.
I think that the question and answer to this topic are too generalized.
Just because American jobs have been moved overseas does not mean that more jobs have not been created in America. You are correct.
However, your rebuttal is also too general: Just because Chinese and Indian entrepreneurs who are officially immigrants have created a new wealth for the US economy does not mean that it is good to open the borders and let South American gangs such as MS13 freely roam and loot the streets of Los Angeles!
What would happen if America all of a sudden became relaxed on immigration laws?
More terrorism. You know it%26#039;s true.|||To me this is a really stupid question......
Most Americans don%26#039;t want to work...but want to get paid to do ...nothing. I get so mad all the time because I work with fools like this...and I am an AMERICAN, funny...your best workers are from a different country most of the time!!!...Americans became lazy....overweight...ya know fast food is the way of LIFE...and a babysitter is raising the kids..or the grandparent.|||Your question should be %26quot; Why don%26#039;t Americans know the following FACT about immigration%26quot;? and not %26quot;myth%26quot; as in the question.
Really two things play into this answer,
Fear
Education
In the past, and even today, many people fear that immigration in any sugnificant amount will debase the prevailing %26quot;ethnic%26quot; culture of the given area, whether that is a mostly white neighborhood in Minnesota, or a Afro-American neighborhood in LA. Change often scares people.
That fact that most Americans are limited in their scope, of the many contributions that past %26quot;waves%26quot; of immigrates have both defined and shaped this country of ours, is due to nothing more then the lack of information made available to them in our schools on this subject. Of course, these immigrants need to follow the proper channels to become part of this American dream.|||American
One cannot answer this question because the meaning of %26#039;American%26#039; isn%26#039;t clear:
- A person or attribute of South or North America
- A person or attribute of the indigenous peoples of South or North America
- A citizen or attribute of the 鈥橴nited States of America鈥? the political correct term is %26#039;US-American%26#039;
Which %26#039;Americans%26#039; do you mean? From North or South America? And from which country in one of theese 2 continents called %26#039;America%26#039;?
%26#039;American%26#039; for %26#039;US-American%26#039; is geographically and politically not correct.
This is a FACT not an OPINION.|||While they do pay some taxes, the truth is that they generally COST more than they pay. If an indigent illegal shows up in an emergency room the hospital is required to provide treatment regardless of their ability to pay. Three hours hooked up to an ECG and an X-Ray can cost over $3,000 or more and the illegal certainly isn%26#039;t going to pay the bill!
We recently had a major wreck on the Interstate caused by an illegal (uninsured of course) who couldn%26#039;t read the signs. The costs of that, largely borne locally, will run into millions.
I have NO issue with legal immigrants whatsoever. I%26#039;m flattered that they chose my beloved country as their adopted home; they can offer no higher homage. But I have a MAJOR issue with the illegals AND the employers who employ them at sub-mimimum wages.
If our government would just start enforcing the laws currently on the books the problem would largely solve itself. If employers were hit with the maximum penalty of $10,000 per day per undocumented worker (legal or otherwise) it would be more expensive to hire illegals that it would be to pay legal workers a living wage.
We have poultry processing plants in my area that are staffed almost exclusively by illegals making about $3.50 per hour, all under the table. They are raided a couple times a year and usually are hit with a measly $25,000 fine. In 2 or 3 weeks, 90% of the illegals who were rounded up are back on the production line! One of the production managers publicly admitted in an interview that the fine was just a cost of doing business but was still much cheaper than paying legal workers the $15 or more per hour that they demanded for such nasty work. When they get raided they do bring in legal local workers and pay them $15 to $18 per hour as %26quot;temps%26quot; but let them go as the illegals return. This has to stop NOW!|||Get a grip on everything here---WE ARE CONCERNED WITH ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS---do you see the word ILLEGAL??? people LEGALLY here in the United States are welcome to compete for housing and jobs like any other legal resident. NO ONE is denying anything to LEGAL immigrants. Stop whining about the issue until you get the facts on the ILLEGAL immigrants who are here. teenagers cannot get the summer jobs anymore because the illegals have them taken. They work for little money as long as it is cash. The job market is NOT always big time computer jobs---there are millions of less skilled jobs that our LEGAL residents could accomplish if the ILLEGAL residents were not taking them for a dollar an hour. Go sit in a hospital waiting room and see how many ILLEGALS are there like it is a FREE clinic. Have you been involved in an accident with an ILLEGAL resident driving??? They get out and run because they have NO license or insurance---while you and your family bleed on the roadway. Stop whining about ILLEGALS--they need to be deported or shot. ALL legals are welcome to enjoy America.|||Most Americans believe the media and what they are told, they do not put time into researching the truth behind many things.|||OK|||Because America is empowered by television and those of use who realise that the media is owned by the government have come to the conclusion that your statement is true.
Those of us who have not either don%26#039;t care, or do not believe you.|||There is a diffrence between legal and illegal imigrants. Legal: following the law and making something of yourself, illegal: selling drugs, forcing teachers and schools to teach spanish, raping women and being released because mexico does not want them back.|||...the vast majority of immigrants hav good intent-don%26#039;t be fooled-they hav more heart than our elite in this country...whom wouldn%26#039;t giv you the time of day.|||ummm... we really don%26#039;t mind intelligent peopple that vome in LEGALLY we are talking about ILLEGALLS big dif.|||Cows are evil|||How many times are you going to ask this?
Legal immigrants skew the numbers since obviously our legal immigration system (less family preferences) is specifically designed to benefit this country. One of the founders of Google is an immigrant, for example, but NOT an illegal immigrant.
And I already pointed out that only federal costs are covered in your study, which doesn%26#039;t include the biggest costs, which are education and health care.|||Ok 3 times is a charm%26gt; There%26#039;s still NO amnesty%26gt; So this is a non issues%26gt;All the illegals will be leaving%26gt;Family stay together%26gt;
A higher than average unemployment rate, ranked 48th in the nation with only Mississippi, Alaska and Michigan ranking higher.
http://money.cnn.com/pf/features/lists/s...
How well will Clinton and Obama do in South Carolina where there is a large illegal alien population and?mortgage rate
I don%26#039;t like Hillary. Sorry!
Cute Avatar.
How well will Clinton and Obama do in South Carolina where there is a large illegal alien population and?
loan
Probably pretty well.|||Obama will knock hillary out of the race with a huge win in South Carolina. She don%26#039;t have a chance|||It%26#039;ll be Edwards%26#039; turn.|||Here%26#039;s the Clinton%26#039;s position on the issue:
http://youtube.com/watch?v=vDtcyVbPvC4
http://youtube.com/watch?v=EHGAxGZts8M%26amp;f...
http://youtube.com/watch?v=DQVgHx_cdEA%26amp;f...
http://youtube.com/watch?v=KiIP_KDQmXs%26amp;f...
http://youtube.com/watch?v=dV9aLlBSjx0%26amp;f...
http://youtube.com/watch?v=ClfpG2-1Bv4%26amp;f...
http://youtube.com/watch?v=gQQQ2dp-Ca4%26amp;f...
http://youtube.com/watch?v=2_KEWUU33Lg
http://youtube.com/watch?v=uIfbCcsgeUw
http://youtube.com/watch?v=4-KiHwKCQso%26amp;f...
Why did those anti-U.S. French elect a pro-U.S. president?
E-mail this page Reader Comments (below)
By M.D. Harmon Portland Press Herald Friday, May 11, 2007
I guess this is the end of freedom fries, not to mention any remaining sentiment to boycott French wines or certain fragant cheeses.
Instead, we should raise a glass of vintage Chardonnay or even Champagne to toast the victory Sunday of a new French president, who without any hesitation said during his entire campaign that it was time to repair relations with %26quot;our good friends, the Americans.%26quot;
Nicholas Sarkozy, 52, is the son of Hungarian immigrants and a law-and-order economic conservative. He soundly beat the Socialist Party nominee, 53-year-old Sègol?ne Royal.
It%26#039;s tempting to cast the race in American terms, seeing Sarkozy as a combination of George W. Bush, John McCain and Rudy Giuliani, with a dash of Fred Thompson thrown in.
Indeed, Sarkozy outraged his leftist critics by visiting the United States during the campaign and being photographed shaking Bush%26#039;s hand.
In that paradigm, Royal becomes (who else?) Hillary (%26quot;don%26#039;t call me Rodham%26quot;) Clinton -- especially since the Frenchwoman, finding that her %26quot;stay-the-collapsing-welfare-state-cours... message was failing to get traction, played the gender card at the end, asking women to vote for her as France%26#039;s first female leader.
That would leave aside Joan of Arc, but that%26#039;s not a comparison worth taking too far.
It may or may not be a lesson for Hillary boosters that the appeal to les femmes didn%26#039;t work.
Sarkozy got 53 percent of the total vote and 52 percent of the women%26#039;s vote, showing that feminist solidarity comes up a bit short when unemployment%26#039;s soaring and tout le mond wonders why so many of your young people think that if Paris isn%26#039;t burning, it%26#039;s not for lack of effort on their part.
As a Wall Street Journal analysis noted Wednesday, voters expect a woman candidate to meet a higher standard for toughness and leadership. The story quoted Democratic pollster Peter Hart as saying, %26quot;One of the challenges is that %26#039;commander in chief%26#039; is so much of the job description.%26quot;
There are those who have tried to downplay this vote, and in some media outlets, coverage of Paris Hilton%26#039;s scrapes with a drunken-driving charge took precedence over Paris, France%26#039;s decision to go with the old free-market vintage as opposed to sipping another soupáon of socialism.
Closing one%26#039;s eyes won%26#039;t make reality go away, however.
This reality indicates, among many other things, that all those people who have been telling us for years that the French really hate Americans may have been confusing France%26#039;s highly anti-American media with the actual sentiments of the people.
Of course, Sarkozy wasn%26#039;t elected entirely, or even primarily, on his pro-American views. He took a strong stand against rioters in both immigrant (read: Muslim) neighborhoods, where the youth unemployment rate tops 40 percent, and in Paris, where spoiled university students spilled into the streets to protest a law that would have allowed their future employers to dismiss them if they couldn%26#039;t do their jobs.
That sounds odd to U.S. ears, but such productivity-strangling laws are common in the socialist-influenced societies of Europe. They are places where, when the government promises to take care of you from the cradle to the grave, it changes your diapers and drops the lid on your coffin.
Sarkozy promised to restore the abandoned dismissal law and make it easier to start small businesses. He vowed to crack down on immigrant rioters, who still protested his election, ironically unable (yet, at least) to see that his policies offer them the best hope they%26#039;ve ever had of escaping France%26#039;s economic doldrums.
Now, conservative leaders expressing a wish for greater friendships with America have been elected not only in France, but in Germany (Angel Merkel, 2005), Canada (Stephen Harper, 2006) and Mexico (Felipe Calder?n, 2006).
With Tony Blair%26#039;s departure as British prime minister next month, this nation loses a great friend, but where his successor, Gordon Brown, will take the country remains to be seen.
That overall trend, however, not only casts the complaints of our own limpid leftists about our support abroad in a somewhat different light, it has very good implications for the struggle against jihadist terrorists in the near future.
The hope of further progress in that fight is perhaps the clearest benefit of Sarkozy%26#039;s election --demonstrating the clarity of the French in seeing what danger confronts them.
As Walid Phares, author of %26quot;The War of Ideas: Jihadism against Democracy,%26quot; wrote this week, Sarkozy%26#039;s victory is a response to a plea his predecessors ignored: %26quot;Please resist the rise of terror that is the urban jihad.%26quot;
%26quot;This is not just another European election,%26quot; Phares wrote, %26quot;it is a benchmark in the Western struggle to win the war on terror.%26quot;
We can hope the odds of victory took a big leap on Sunday.
Why did those anti-U.S. French elect a pro-U.S. president?car financing
Part of the reason the French economy sucks is because the biggest industry in France is tourism. There has been a big drop in American tourists since the begining of the Iraqi liberation. Follow the money.
Why did those anti-U.S. French elect a pro-U.S. president? loan
Cause they are sick of the immigrants coming into their country and then demanding the country suit their lifestyle.
And why are you suddenly so concerned about the French?|||A variety of reading rather than just one source indicated the election results came from a broad range of domestic issues, not just a French response to the invasion and occupation of Iraq. But enjoy your french wine anyway.|||You forgot one thing, the French Government, the french president, roch sherock? was the leading antiamerican voice, He was the one who said that Europe did not want americans invovled in Kosovo, who complained that the US was not helping in Kosovo when the UN got into trouble (note the flip) and then, while in receipt of funds from Husain%26#039;s oil for aid funds, was the most out spoken of the US invasion of Iraq. If this new leader of France is truly pro-american, then it only shows that it is truly the people of a country that determine what the rules are, so now it is time to get that message to the American Politicians by voting for an Independant Candidate, but who?|||They woke up to the reality of liberalism.
I have more respect now for the French that they look like they have grown a spin.
What does this also say about the the liberal line the world hates us when the French of all people elect a Pro-American.
Time for them to change their line....I doubt it though.|||Read the economist, NY Times, or something informative. This isn%26#039;t so radical a move as you might think. This guy was pretty centrist compared to his main competitor - Ségolène Royal who wanted to basically feed france breast milk as she %26quot;listened to the people%26quot;. That person was disgusting to what passes as centrists in France.
Adieu|||The French election had very little to do with the so-called war on terror and next to nothing to do with the U.S.
It was an election based almost exclusively on domestic issues.
I%26#039;ve got news for you. They won%26#039;t be joining us in Iraq.
They continue to recognize the war in Iraq as the strategic blunder it truly is and Sarcozy is in full agreement with that assessment.
Your delusion that this election represents something skewed the direction of the U.S., will slowly dissipate in the coming weeks or probably months in your case.
And you will finally have learned the important distinction between a %26quot;pro-U.S. president%26quot; and a non anti-U.S. president.|||Many years back the France,England had a plan to take over the Suez canal to protect their oil flow from the mid east The U.S put a stop to it I find it most interesting they also talk of war for oil were is it?|||Seems the french really changed course:%26quot;
: convergence of the European and American views. Europeans are now convinced that Iran is working assiduously to develop nuclear weapons and cannot be trusted. French government officials have even gone so far as to complain that the U.S. needs to “act American” and be more overtly threatening to pressure Iran into accepting the advantageous deals European governments have been offering. European concern,%26quot;
We got to be more American..roflmao
A little over one year ago:
1) Consumer confidence stood at a 2 1/2 year high;
2) Regular gasoline sold for $2.19 a gallon;
3) The unemployment rate was 4.5%.
Since voting in a Democratic Congress in 2006 we%26#039;ve seen:
1) Consumer confidence plummet;
2) The cost of regular gasoline soar to over $3 a gallon;
3) Unemployment is up to 5% (a 10% increase);
4) American households have seen $2.3 trillion in equity value evaporate
(stock and mutual fund losses);
5) Americans have seen their home equity drop by $1.2 trillion dollars;
6) 1% of American homes are in foreclosure.
America voted for change in 2006, and we got it!
Be careful what you vote for in November, you might get it again!
Can you afford it?
Isn%26#039;t it Time for a sanity check?credit rating
Thank you for pointing out just a few FACTS!
Not that the denizens of the Democrat Party are particularly interested in FACTS.
No, they%26#039;re more interested in how they FEEL, which is a truly sad state of affairs but since they%26#039;re incapable of electing a President we%26#039;ll at least be able to keep those nitwits in Congress somewhat in check.
Isn%26#039;t it Time for a sanity check?
loan
I got a job yesterday!|||no I cannot afford it...i am in Real Estate and my income has plummeted! How exactly is this the fault of the Dem%26#039;s in congress?|||The Congress does not manage the Economy ignoramus. The Hitler Bush economic policies and the trillion dollars he spent in Iraq is putting all americans in colection agencies. One of this days China is gonna take USA to auction.|||excellent post.|||They are still going to blame Bush for everything that goes wrong for the rest of time.|||WOW excellent question, dems will likely ignore your facts, it seems like the more conservative we vote the better our country gets and vice versa with liberal voting, bush is no conservative and congress has leaned so far left with puglossi leading, and these are the consequences.....so no i cant afford it....|||This is a preplanned assault on the American economy in an effort to put Hillary in the White House.
Congress did it to Bush 1,tried to with Bush 2 and are doing it again to McCain.
Think about it,the same problems every election cycle with Dems controling Congress.|||good point|||yes it is time|||Wow did you ever hit the nail on the head!!!!
No I can%26#039;t afford it, but unfortunately the ones who %26quot;reap the rewards%26quot; of a Democratic majority don%26#039;t pay taxes and live off the government through various welfare programs (paid for by those of us who work really hard for everything we have!!!!)
Until the US stops with its socialist tendencies that we see more of each day, personal responsibility seems to be a thing of the past. When nobody has to pay for their actions, chaos emerges and runs rampant, morals thrown to the wayside...welcome to 2008!|||Well, George Bush has been doing nothing but destroy America for the last 7 years. How do you expect the new Democratic president to fix the mess?
And you blame the Democratic Congress? Bush could be using the billions a month he spends in Iraq to prop the U.S. economy. How about the 44 billions he is spending in France? And the tax cut for the wealthy?
Be careful whom you vote for in November. You could end up with more of the McSame.|||Did you actually expect either party to fix all the problems Bush%26#039;s war and tax cuts for the ultra weathy to be fixed in a year and a half??? It will take many years to get us out of the mess him and his cronies put us in.|||When Bill Clinton was president
1) America had its longest running economic boom.
2) People were trading in their little hatchbacks for SUVs because gasoline was so affordable, they could waste it.
3) America was the world%26#039;s only superpower.
4) the budget was balanced
Since W has been in charge,
1)The economy has been as bad as its been when the other George Bush was president
2) America got knocked on its @ss by 19 terrorists who did%26#039;nt even have guns
3) The war W started has cost the lives of 3000 Americans, and about 3 billion $ a month.
4) the budget is in deficit
5) oil is $ 110 a barrel
America voted for Gore in 2000, we got that moron the Supreme Court decided should be our president
Who cares who you vote for in November, the GOP will win anyway|||Yes thanks. And no - we can%26#039;t afford anymore Dem%26#039;s in DC!|||Typical Repub selective statistics. Now do the same only go back eight years Gomer.|||Hillary will restore the USA to peace and prospreity if we elect Hillary. That%26#039;s a good thing, right?|||Support the only man qualified for the job.
Ron Paul serves on the Joint Economic Committee; and the Committee on Financial Services (as Ranking Member of the Domestic and International Monetary Policy, Trade and Technology subcommittee, and Vice-Chair of the Oversight and Investigations subcommittee)|||You are a Republican that is obvious. Now will you please mention how since the Idiot bush took office the dollar has lost 60% of it%26#039;s value. Mortgage default is higher than any time in history. Wages are lower than ever. The Democrats have only 1 majority not a total majority as you claim. And please speek of all the republican petifiles and gays being cought. I can deal with a man and a women like Spitzer but not with gays and petifiles who hide in the government and use it for protection and hunting ground.
Comparing Clinton (a) to Bush (b),
inflation (a) 2.6% (b) 1.9%
unemployment rate (a) 6.2%, (b) 5.5%
productivity growth (a) 0.5% (b) 4.1%
hourly compensation (a) -0.3% (b) +0.8
and the list goes on
How is inflation going up, high unemployment, less productivity, and lowering pay help the economy. I am no Bush lover, but the numbers show the economy is better with him.
Why do people say the economy was good with Clinton?construction loans
There was a high level of economic growth and a federal budget surplus for most of the Clinton years, which is certainly not true of the Bush years. Nonetheless, these figures you list might still be accurate.
Many people have the sense to judge the economy on what actually happens in their lives instead of what statistics analysts and investors are quoting at them. They can see things have been getting steadily worse for the poor and middle classes ever since the 1970s compared to the rich. In that sense, things really were better under Clinton, but they were still getting worse.
People say things were better under Clinton simply because they don%26#039;t like Bush. The dot com bubble lets them rightfully say that there was a higher level of growth under Clinton, and Bush%26#039;s tax cuts and invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan brought a deficit. These are the facts, and so I agree, Clinton doesn%26#039;t really deserve credit for a better economy, but neither does Bush.
Why do people say the economy was good with Clinton?
loan
Who in the right mind says that? Remember the 2000 recession under Clinton? It%26#039;s funny how the the current slump corresponds with the Democrats controlling Congress! Is this just coincidence? By the way I am a Democrat. Please vote Democrat. Thank you|||The same reason why people say that the country was good during the Regan years.|||You are either cherry picking numbers, got them wrong, or confusing trends with levels.
If you compare the beginning of Clinton to the end you find nearly every rising upward. Under Bush you find things going down and then up and then stalling again.
Under Clinton you find real wages, incomes, median wages, average wages, employment participation all rising. Poverty falling. Under Bush you had falling or flat wages, rising poverty, until very late. Look also at the trade, personal savings and US budget deficits.|||Your statistics, especially with productivity and inflation are probably wrong, but anyway....
Under Clinton the unemployment rate started very high but eventually dropped to below 4%. Under Bush we have never gotten below 4.5%.
Your productivity stats are totally wrong; productivity growth in the mid- to late 1990s was much, much higher than 0.5 percent.
Also, with regards to hourly compensation. It actually increased in the 1990s. In the 2000s nearly all the economic growth was limited to the top 10% of income earners. Economic inequality is skyrocketing under the Bush/GOP policies.
Clinton economics was far, far better than Bush economics for the average American. The growth actually benefited the majority of society, not just the wealthy few.|||If you look at productivity growth graph at
http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/02...
You will see it was increasing under Clinton and falling under Bush. With the increasing productivity, incomes increased faster than they had since the 60%26#039;s and unemployment fell to the lowest levels in decades. If you asked people if they are better of than they were 7 years ago in 2000 almost everybody said yes. How many people would say yes today?
The unemployment rate here is 4.8% and in Mexico is 3.2%. How does that make sense to come here and work, if unemployment there is lower???
https://www.cia.gov/library/publications... (US facts)
https://www.cia.gov/library/publications... (Mexico facts)
Why are you coming here for work?loans uk
Because they can and they want to. So get over it.
Why are you coming here for work? loan
BECAUSE WE CAN... WE CAN.|||because everything in mexico is a lot more expensive than it is here...and the unemployment rate might be higher here but there are more jobs here than there is in mexico..most people are farmers because there isnt a lot of job opportunities...its not all about the unemployment rate you kno....you have to look at all of the factors...like the jobs available..and how much they get paid..|||Because if the unemployment there is lower they need to come where they can find a job.|||You go girl! Go back and build your country and help out your own people!|||many are not wanted by mexican employers because they are illiterate, criminal, drug addicts. after they escape to the usa they are constantly on the move, no one cares about the quality of their work, or if they show up the next day. but for a days work they can fiesta for a week in the usa, in mexico a days work might not even buy them dinner.|||Because life in general here is better.|||Simple answer: Mexicans are greedy. They make sufficient money in Mexico but they see that Americans are better off and want a piece of the pie as well. It%26#039;s that or they think we %26quot;stole%26quot; this land from them, which is quite the fictional story they cooked up there.|||they don%26#039;t just come here to work. and, on a side note, they get paid less in mexico.|||are you forgetting about wages?|||it probably has to do with the fact us americans are not incompetent to hold a job. I know i%26#039;ll always have jobs because of my education and skill sets. The only americans worrying about jobs are the ones too lazy to pick up any skill sets or drug addicts...in either case, it%26#039;s those americans we should send to mexico.|||why dont u go live there and then u tell me why u rather be here than over there|||Well let%26#039;s see.A certain fast food place in the U S pays around $7.00 or more an hour starting wage.That same place pays $1.20 an hour in Mexico but yet still charges the same price for a Mc Burger as in the U S.Food costs the same there as here.Many things do.As far as unemployment rates those are also based on available jobs in certain area%26#039;s.If you look at our unemployment rate we could say not many people are out of jobs.But that%26#039;s not the case.Millions are.To use unemployment statistics to further the argument against illegal immigration isn%26#039;t a good idea.Because it would blow the argument of they take our jobs by the statistics that show unemployment is lower than it%26#039;s been in many years.So which is it?They take our jobs or not?That is a real question I guess that needs answering.|||It%26#039;s not all about getting more money. Live one day in Mexico and then tell me which country you%26#039;ll rather be in. Most illegal immigrants come to give their kids a better life not to steal America%26#039;s glory.|||What?|||The minimum wage in Mexico is $4.56 per day (48.67MN) vs
$5.15 per hour in the U.S,, Mexicans pay an average cost of 25% of their income on food, Which would be a of budget of $1.14 to feed your family a day. a household in Mexico is 25 times poorer than a household in the U,S,.
Any way I look at the cost assoiciated to your logic It does not add up.
The only unemployed people that get counted when they tell you the unemployment rate are those receiving unemployment benefits. If your benefits have run out, YOU ARE NO LONGER COUNTED as unemployed. I%26#039;m looking for a ratio here. Its important to state which catagory you fall into.
Are you unemployed and receiving benefits or unemployed and not receiving benefits. Please state which.?yes loans
unemployed and not receiving benefits...
:-(
Are you unemployed and receiving benefits or unemployed and not receiving benefits. Please state which.?
loan
If your benefits have run out, you are not longest in their list, so they can not count you anymore.|||Unemployed and NOT. They told me to check in again in July.
I%26#039;m really dissapointed in the direction America is going right now. Ever since Bush got into office, we%26#039;ve been sliding down the hill.
The American dollar has weakened against every other currency, EVEN THE F*CKIN CHINESE YUAN. That%26#039;s ridiculous. Their money used to be an 8th of ours - now its getting nearer to a 7th.
America still has plenty of people starving and families LOSING THEIR HOMES because of the unemployment rate.
What%26#039;s worse than the unemployment is UNDEREMPLOYMENT. America%26#039;s jobs are going to Asia and everywhere else and our people don%26#039;t have the money to retrain themselves.
Housing prices, energy prices and food prices have hit ridiculous highs and the middle class and poor are suffering everyday.
Unlike the rich class, the rest can%26#039;t adjust and are only falling further behind.
The war in Iraq has brought America to near 9 Trillion dollars in debt and if we continue this way, I see a very possible 10 Trillion before Bush%26#039;s term ends.
Why isn%26#039;t America strengthening itself?education loans
You%26#039;ve posted some VERY valid points and I think the answer lies in the fact that we aren%26#039;t demanding change. I send letters, I make phone calls, I make my voice heard but there%26#039;s not enough people doing that. I think this war in Iraq is at the base of a lot of this countries problems. Our military is stretched to the limits and the trillions spent on this war are needed desperately in many other areas. I personally feel the President and his administration are so bogged down in Iraq they can no longer continue to run this country appropriately. We deserve better and it%26#039;s time to demand it.
Why isn%26#039;t America strengthening itself? loan
WRITE 2 PREZ
1600 PENSYLVANIA AVE.
WASHINGTON D.C.
TELL EM|||America is a continent, are you referring to Mexico or Canada or the united states?|||What nonesense! I suggest you take economics 101 before you post any messages that make you look so ignorant!
Housing prices and energy prices are set by the market, and NOT by any administration. Unemployment under President Bush has been lower than it has been in the 70%26#039;s, 80%26#039;s, and 90%26#039;s, even under Clinton.
BUT FOR Clinton%26#039;s inaction during his 8 years sitting on his derriere getting oral, and kissing the Europeans we wouldn%26#039;t be in the dangerous situation we have been in!
Have you already forgotten about the 1st terror attack on the World Trade Center? How about the attack on the Cole? How about other attacks on U.S. interests during Clinton%26#039;s administration? It would have been much easier to deal with Islamofascism during Clinton%26#039;s administration than it is now.
Writing such nonesense as you did not only shows your ignorance, but complete irresponsibility. Outrageous!|||From my perspective, the majority of Americans seem to believe that faith in God supercedes everything else in this country. And people vote their identity, not their self-interest. So they see themselves as middle-class Americans on the rise even if they%26#039;re not so they vote that identity.
Then there%26#039;s greed... good ole American, doesn%26#039;t-matter-how-Christian-you-are, must-do-better-than-the-other-guy mentality. That has assisted in unemployment and house and gas prices. The rich get richer and the poor die in hurricanes.
I have no solutions... there is no guarantee that even if we had a liberal democrat in office that things would be better. Different, but not necessarily better. Crappy presidents come in every flavor, too.|||i have two words for you Geprge W. Bush!!!!!!|||What r u doing about it? If you are an American, what if you lost people on 9/11. We can%26#039;t just be attacked and not do anything about.
I%26#039;m in the poor class, but its my own fault, not the gov%26#039;ts fault. We are much safer with Bush, than any democrat who would just bow down to the middle-east.
GO BUSH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!...|||Because America is busy weakening ourselves with disasters like Iraq. Just think of the medical coverage that could have been provided, the increase educational opportunities for our children, the number of miles of track replaced to make our rail service safe and efficient.
The bill for running things like down instead of up is just starting to obviously and seriously damage us in the United States.|||I agree with you 100%. But it%26#039;s not just Bush, even though I can%26#039;t stand the man. It%26#039;s those spineless worms in Congress, who care more about getting re-elected, than making the tough decisions they%26#039;re suppose to make for the good of the country. Also special interests have infected the process. ...and when the poop hits the fan, they%26#039;ll all be blaming someone else. It%26#039;s awful.|||I am agree with you all except one thing. I am for the weakening of US dollar. That actually will help the exports for US. If our currency exchange rate is low, we will not import as many, and we don%26#039;t lose job oversea that fast. Our employment will goes up.
The only problem is the oil prices, we buy so much oil using US currency, that will hurt us in term of gas price.
To add more fuel to the fire, our government is not doing enough to make our medical cost down. They blocked us from buying cheaper medication from Canada so that pharmacy companies makes tons more money.
One more thing, did you notice what is the filing income for Bush and Chaney ? If they were so ****ing dedicated to handle the presidential duties, why the hell they have time to makes so many millions of dollars ? They have time to trade stocks in the white house ?
I personally think the congressman and president should take pay cuts and their subsidies to save us money. Plus they should pay tax on the campaign contributions. And an extra tax on the book they write after their terms.|||Actually there was a decline in the economy just previous to Clinton%26#039;s leaving office.
The major dip in the economy took place after 9/11, and again with Katrina.
I have been in real estate since bush has been in office, and my mother since Clinton. And honestly i have no idea what you%26#039;re talking about. Housing prices are direct reflections of the economy, since their production and sales are completely dependant on peoples buying them. Home ownership is at its highest in decades. Which in turn provides a much stronger society and economy.
Also, i dont know what middle class are suffering, we%26#039;re middle class.... not even high middle class, and our tax refunds have been getting bigger with each passing year. Next year will be even greater since we%26#039;re having our first child. If you%26#039;re suffering so horribly you should try going to a tax professional and having your taxes prepared.
Tax cuts were made clear across the board. It used to be that the very rich were paying taxes by a different measure, paying more just because they had more, and not based on percentage or medians.
Now we all have tax cuts and we all basically pay at the same level with our incomes providing the curve. So really no one should be complaining.
Energy prices have gone up since Katrina, and since Iran (one of our top providers on the world market for oil), and since the pipe line trouble in Alaska. The lack of fuel due to the war you can blame on Clinton, he sold something like 90% of our military oil reserves during his terms, so now the government has to buy oil for the military, instead of having a reserve for war /emergency times.
War does cost money, a lot of money. But so do terrorist attacks, home land security, health care (what little we actually have), welfare, and natural disasters.
The majority of people losing their homes lose them due to equity loans and third and fourth mortgages, all of which they took out on their own for the sake of launching their lives into another status so they could keep up with the jones%26#039; and pay off their huge credit card debts.
most european monies are stronger than ours simply because of the introduction of the Euro, instead of one countries economy, they have numerous pools of money to add to its strength.
Iam not saying our presidents plans are perfect, but all things considered they could be much worse.|||its all because george bush only looks out for himself and no one else....god help you if you voted for him...he is just ineffective, crooked, and probably has some sort of learning disability (not that those are bad things) that hasnt been fixed|||BUSH|||Whoa! Calm down there my friend. I agree with you, but don%26#039;t be hating the Chinese. The are hardworking and smart people. The Chinese Yuan may be less in value than the US dollar but remember right now, China, Japan, India and South Korea are our bankers and in essence our owners. Don%26#039;t be hating on them man..they are the brains. Isn%26#039;t it weird how when you go to a brand-name store like MACY%26#039;s and you see all these expensive and over-the-top items but when you flip it over it says %26#039;Made in China%26#039;?? So be a bit tolerant my friend the Chinese, Indians, Japanese, South Koreans and other Asian nations may well be running our White House and country some day in the future!
That MONKEY that is running around playing president is to blame for our mess! This fool goes across continents to start unnecessary and VERY COSTLY wars and neglect the people living in poverty in the US.
Our national slogan should not be %26#039;God Bless America%26#039;, it should be %26#039;God Save Us From This Madman Calling Himself President%26#039;|||To blame one man - even him, for the entire state of the world and its economy is naieve.|||Well in a sense, we kind of are strengthing our military. By going into Iraq and launching a war on terrorism, the United States is going after terrorists that have been a threat to the country. Not to mention if we pull out of Iraq or if we didn%26#039;t go to Iraq at all, the terrorists would come to the United States. Its either we take them out on there turf or our turf. One or the other. Someone had to step up and take care of this problem, and I%26#039;m a proud of my country taking the lead in the war on terrorism. God Bless the United States!
.
1. That congressmen do not pay Social security tax%26#039;s.
2. That Congressmen receive their full pay for life after leaving.
3. That people who have used all their unemployment benefits aren%26#039;t counted when the unemployment rate is calculated.
4. That bush%26#039;s IQ is really 81.
Are you surprised at how many people believe these Internet Myths?interest only loan
I am way past being surprised by the severe stupidity of most people on a lot of subjects.
Are you surprised at how many people believe these Internet Myths? loan
Yes that last one is really hard to believe.|||I think whenever someone asks %26quot;what do you think%26quot; they end up telling you what they think and you aren%26#039;t really looking for an answer, because there was no question.|||those that believe all of them... it%26#039;s crazy what all is out there...
those you mention... and all the one%26#039;s about Clinton... HAHAHA... some of those are insane... yet you still hear them...
http://www.snopes.com/politics/clintons/...|||I have heard from what I assumed to be a reliable source that their retirement is higher than their pay in some cases. I am not motivated enough to read that whole article or believe anything to the contrary on the basis of something on the internet. Maybe it is just too easy for me to believe that politicians would do it.|||1. Congressmen know how to evade taxes.
2. Congressmen had influence to force businessmen to pay.
3. Unemployment benefits are not counted for the rate.
4. The IQ of Bush is deemed below the average by public.
%26quot;Liberals are weak minded and ignorant...liberal profesors have taken over the education system and spread propaganda ...%26quot;
%26quot;Bush is great...unemployment is at an all-time low. Yet welfare Democrat bums sit around waiting for government checks...%26quot; (then how is the unemployment rate so low?)
And the classic:
%26quot;Libs are america hate terrorists%26quot;
Yeah, half the US really hates the US.
Is this Liberal Derangement Syndrom?
Now, I%26#039;m not attackng conservatives. But the minority that says this (seemingly the majority on Yahoo) appears to have given up all self-respect for any reasoning just to attack Liberals.
I thought the Conservative attitude is supposed to be %26quot;Grit your teeth, do your best to solve a problem, thank those that help you, and take silent pride for your work. And help those trying to solve problems.%26quot; I thought Conservatives took honor in that. So take the honor, and hopefully others shall follow suit.
So has the want for insulting completely shrouded our reason?boat loans
Cons also insult our intelligence when they say %26quot;Republicans favor smaller government%26quot;.
So has the want for insulting completely shrouded our reason? loan
Well said mentat.|||I believe it has.|||Finally, someone with something to say!!|||Well that%26#039;s what you get for thoughtin%26#039;. Reason? On here? You would actually have to have some legitimate questions that required some thought to have reason. Most of what we see on here is nothing but pure unadulterated flame-throwing.|||I know you are, but what am I?
Ha
Ha
By the by, the raiders don%26#039;t suck.|||I think it%26#039;s very sad that the country is so stagnant and deficient in ideas right now, much of it caused by this political cheer leading. It%26#039;s like you%26#039;re at a football game... %26quot;RAIDERS SUCK!%26quot; (I am not a football person, so I don%26#039;t mean that :P ) or, %26quot;REPUBLICANS ARE IGNORANT!%26quot;
I want to see a real discussion in politics, about the issues that%26#039;s important, that we can change. I want to see compromise, I want to understanding and rationality. Sadly, that%26#039;s slow in coming...|||What do you expect from 2 opposite sides. Just think what they are doing in heaven and hell.|||Yes, well, this is probably not the best forum to have adult discussions in general. Most of the questions I see are not real questions, but taunts, rants and opinions disguised as questions. It%26#039;s not likely to ever stop.|||You may be talking about what used to be the official %26quot;conservative%26quot; mantra. You know, back when anybody actually knew the actual definition of %26quot;conservative%26quot; before it was assumed by the Republican Party of today and polluted by Karl Rove and Newt Gingrich.
It would be nice if reasonable discussions would occasionally happen on Answers.
Your piece is well said!
Before we start, yes, I have a job.
My question:
Since the unemployment rate has been monitored as a statistic, there has ALWAYS been unemployment.
That means that there%26#039;s not enough jobs for people out of work.
So how can you tell someone to get a job if the economy isn%26#039;t providing enough jobs to be had?
GET A JOB! Tell me about it......?loan forgiveness
95% Employment is excellent by any standards. There will always be at least 5% of all citizens that just refuse to work - period.
GET A JOB! Tell me about it......? loan
Start a company and hire all the trash the government
has filled this country with,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
Well if your food stamp government did not destroy every good job and allow every other country to over run this one and then
fill it with every piece of trash from every other country,,
Then you could get a real job,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,Vote for Hillary
or Obama so it gets worse|||i think there are jobs out there that people just don%26#039;t want! like for example they layed off 300 or 320 illegal people at a chicken plant near my home, but now they are having a hard time functioning b/c no one wants to work there!!! no one wants to work in a smelly chicken plant killing chickens and cleaning them for sale! and the shifts are 12 hours and they pay about 8.00/hr. and there are over 300 positions to be filled!!! so yeah there are many jobs out there but people don%26#039;t want them!!! they would rather live off of unemployment than work a hard job like that! i have seen it many times!|||By the number of Illegal immigrants and the help wanted ads infesting this country.|||Transitional unemployment was historically around 4%. (people who quit and are looking for a new job)
Unemployment today is revovling around work people don%26#039;t %26quot;want%26quot; to do, not that they can%26#039;t find any work. I think I will sit on my *** for a while until that CEO position at Ford becomes available. I sent my resume, so I must be trying.|||Um, it is not 95% employment it is 95% not collecting unemployment insurance. Learn a little about the statistics you hear in the media before quoting them. The true percentage of employed and unemployed is not known within the United States because the government will not track that number.|||You can get a job if you are willing to do WHATEVER. There are ALWAYS jobs in the paper.
Some people are too lazy to get a job if the Government supports them and some think they are too good for a menial job if they have an education. We knew a man in a $600 K house here in my city that was out of work for THREE YEARS because he would not take just ANY job to support his family. (they lived off savings, Grants for the kids for college, and his wife worked extra) He had an affair and the family is ruined thanks to him and his %26quot;pride%26quot;.|||We are not in a depression.
If you check the Want Ads, you see that there are many jobs out their, however undesirable.
There are temp job agencies that are always looking for workers.
You can go online, and google jobs in your area.
If you don%26#039;t have the education or training to get a good job, go to school part time and get a bad job in the meantime.
Hey, if you need a job so badly, I need someone to cut my lawn every two weeks. It%26#039;s a start.|||Try that Socialist Workers Paradise,FRANCE.
20% unemployment.
The real Question is why are jobs leaving the country?
I%26#039;ll give you a hint.
35% corporate income tax
Profit makes the world go around.
Would you INVEST in a days work without being paid,Profit from it?
A little over one year ago:
1) Consumer confidence stood at a 2 1/2 year high;
2) Regular gasoline sold for $2.19 a gallon;
3) the unemployment rate was 4.5%.
Since voting in a Democratic Congress in 2006 we%26#039;re
seen:
1) Consumer confidence plummet;
2) the cost of regular gasoline soar to over $3 a gallon;
3) Unemployment is up to 5% (a 10% increase);
4) American households have seen $2.3 trillion in equity value
evaporate (stock and mutual fund losses);
5) Americans have seen their home equity drop by
$1.2 trillion dollars;
6) 1% of American homes are in foreclosure.
America voted for change in 2006, and it happened!
Now what are the candidates running for office offering?
What has happened since Democrats took control of Congress?bridge loan
Coincidence, I think not. I don%26#039;t think we can afford more %26quot;change%26quot;.
What has happened since Democrats took control of Congress? loan
The Dem%26#039;s screwed it up hahahahaha! Not all on Bush hahahahahaha!|||They want to %26quot;change%26quot; things even further.|||i dont know why everyone%26#039;s picking on the democrats
it%26#039;s not like they%26#039;ve done anything|||To answer your first question - Bush has started using his veto power. Something he never did when the republicans controlled congress.|||More change, does the Word Homeless mean anything.|||they do have a very low approval rate.....your tax dollars...working against you....|||Even though Democrats have a majority in congress, they don%26#039;t have enough of a majority to pass useful legislation, either it would be useless to pass as they cannot override a veto, or the Republicans in congress threaten to filibuster voting on the bill. (and since a filibuster requires 6/10 of all senators to vote to end it, to actually pass any piece of legislation, the democrats need to bring roughly 10 republicans to their side.)
Threat of a filibuster is enough these days to prevent a bill from passing... it is somewhat sad I admit.|||Bush vetos just about every bill that comes to his desk. How do you blame Dems for that?????
Not to mention....wasn%26#039;t the Bush tax cuts supposed to make the economy great???? Whoops....guess not.
Maybe RECORD HIGH deficit spending wasn%26#039;t such a bright idea in hindsight....
But I%26#039;m not worried....you can blame the dems all you want....the majority of Americans blame the president (people always blame the president for economic troubles).|||Gasoline prices were already high before then, and the mortgage issues, which are definitely covered by 5 and 6, and partly explain 1, were a bubble waiting to burst well before the Democrats took Congress. Plus, the stock market, referred to in point 4, has been unimpressive since 9/11.|||some things are cyclic and a congress that promised improved economics and did not deliver %26amp; a congress that promised to end the war and did not deliver .... wait, a minute, I am beginning to see your point. Re-reading your facts ....
That change does not look very good to me, but then again I am not a dem that voted them into office, so maybe the dems are satisfied and want more of the same.|||I had to use my answer just to share the enjoyment I got out of VerdiOjos answer , if they didnt screw us right and left youd swear they didnt exist|||The democrats will not stop till we are all on welfare .|||I love this spin question..... The week after the Iraq war started gas went up $1.00 a gallon, Bush unaware gas prices are high.....
Since Dems took over ...Republicans have blocked/ destroyed passage of any to help our ailing economy and The President veto%26#039;s anything Congress brings forward by Dems.
The rich republicans love this housing senerio, they can buy property at pennies on the dollar then wait till values go up again then make more fortunes....|||at least they got to the bottom of steroid scandal in baseball...
thanks,|||and i suppose that none of this would have happened anyway? gasoline was under a dollar when bush came to office,deregulation was a top priority during the first term and a half of the bush administration. the obvious results are the steep drop in both the sock market and consumer confidence.
home equity loses equal big profits to the businesses that trade in that area,can you remember %26quot;Enron%26quot;.
congress doesn%26#039;t hire but the business world does and they are closely allied to the republican party
the spin machine is certainly running at full speed for that conclusion to be reached given what the republicans have done to the country.
this question would be truly funny if it were not so depressing. to me it is just another reason why conservative/republicans are to be view with suspicion,they are never responsible for any of the ills that face this country even when the trail leads directly back to here failed policies.
I have an assignment
I am given gdp unemployment rate and inflation in numbers
I don%26#039;t know what to do next it says
using the as-ad model illustrate an economy that is in long run equilibrium .
on your diagram illustrate economic growth show or state what happens to gdp and the price level
on a new diagram illustrate a short run equilibrium with a recessionary gap.
I am doing the united states so
gdp:13.86 trillion
unemployment 4.6%
inflation 2.7%
Now I don%26#039;t know what to do with these numbers please help me.
p.s Don%26#039;t tell me I have to make a graph I%26#039;m not that dumb I need to know where they go and a simple plan on what I am to do.
Macroeconomics help?no fax loan
Oh man. Im sorry lol
I had 2 do the same exact thing last year in high skool in Economics. Both micro %26amp; macro.
I sucked at it tho.
It was sooo confusing!!
So i know where youre coming from.
Dont u have a textbook for the class??
Inside it Shud have the steps to do the graph.
We forget that Congress is more responsible for what happens, rather than the president.
THE AMERICAN PEOPLE ASKED FOR A CHANGE AND THEY GOT IT:
A little over one year ago:
1) Consumer confidence stood at a 2 1/2 year high;
2) Regular gasoline sold for $2.19 a gallon;
3) the unemployment rate was 4.5%.
Since voting in a Democratic Congress in 2006 we%26#039;ve seen:
1) Consumer confidence plummet;
2) the cost of regular gasoline soar to over $3 a gallon;
3) Unemployment is up to 5% (a 10% increase);
4) American households have seen $2.3 trillion in equity value evaporate (stock and mutual fund losses);
5) Americans have seen their home equity drop by $1.2 trillion dollars;
6) 1% of American homes are in fore closure.
America voted for change in 2006, and got it!
The most significant accomplishment by the Democratic controlled Congress in 2007:
THEY VOTED TO INCREASE THEIR PAY !!!!
What has the democratic congress done for you in the past year???sba loans
You see the way you screwed up is trying to argue the facts with liberals...they don%26#039;t understand facts only lies and smoke screens....and pretty colored balloons with pictures of clowns.....don%26#039;t try and educate the democrats they can%26#039;t....no they won%26#039;t learn...never will.....It%26#039;s not in their doctrine to evolve .....it%26#039;s easier to blame the republicans and stick their small heads back in the sand and whine whine whine.....
This is my imitation of a democrat.....
WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA BAD OLE BUSH
WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
DIRTY FILTHY REPUBLICANS WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA...
SEE THERE IS NO HOPE ARGUING WITH BRAIN DEAD LIBERALS......
What has the democratic congress done for you in the past year???
loan
Not one thing...|||all these problems are because of 1 year of a democratic congress.
has nothing to do with 6 years of a Republican congress and
7 years of Bush/Cheney
!|||Nothing, because of the obstructionist Republicans and the president. Try not to blame the democrats for Bush%26#039;s bankrupt policies that he instituted with the help of a Republican controlled congress. Nice try.|||The only thing the Dem congress has done since it is in control, it%26#039;s to make America fail in everything possible. That%26#039;s why I%26#039;m voting republican this time.|||Well, you have to admit, they sure did change things.|||They just keep doing the same old, same old like the rest of the %26quot;dual party%26quot; system keeps doing. It is the system, stupid. Unless you can recall and kick some butts and get their attention, they will remain arrogant and run up the charge card entertaining and pleasing the lobbyists and the contributing corps.
they work for the corps not penny ante working people. we have a thoughly elitist form of government, call it dems or reps or whatever. they work for the fat cats.
i am saying it doesn%26#039;t matter which person you vote for, i say it is the system that is controlled by fat cats. you vote means diddly. that is all just for show - it %26quot;proves%26quot; what a nice democracy this country enjoys. freedom, justice and all that pap.|||Well nothing...because Bush (the idiot) vetoes everything|||The Democrats have tried to accomplish many positive things that would of helped out many people across the country. But Bush and his republicanTs have struck most everything down and continued with there failed policies that have brought us where we are.
But there is hope. As soon the the Democrats win the white house things will imporve. If you dont believe me just be paitient and wait till next year. We will be out of this war and the economy will improve.|||Samr thing any democratic congress has ever done for working people, nothing.|||I agree with courtesyflush.|||increased their pay, and raised my taxes. I expect more of the same in Nov unless people wake up and see what these candidates really stand for.|||What they have done is prove that there is no substantive difference in foreign policy between dems and reps.
There is much TALK of difference, but the ACTION reveals little difference.
Has the democratic congress fulfilled their mandate to end the Iraq war? I rest my case.
People must realize that foreign policy is not determined by the governing party. It is determined by the Council on Foreign Relations and the multinational corporations and global bankers that influence the CFR.
Dems who believe that election of their candidate in November will result in real change to foreign policy are in for a disappointment.
If you wish to see change in foreign policy, Ron Paul is your only choice.|||you must know that the pugs have set a new record for the number of times they have stopped the senate by forcing the senate to pass all bills by a sixty vote count which the Dem%26#039;s don%26#039;t have|||You can%26#039;t point to a single piece of legislation in the past year that resulted in any it the events you listed. You don;t even know when they took office (2007, not 2006). And you conveniently ignore the fact many of the issues you list began to occur while the republicans controlled congress.|||Can%26#039;t do much with Bush vetoing everything|||Nothing!|||You are right. They have not kept 1 promise. Nancy Pelosi wanted a new jet to get around in. All they have done is help themselves. They were going to cut the pork barrel spending in half-instead it is higher, a whopping $17.4 billion|||They introduced a bill to increase the minimum wage to $7.50 per hour. It was struck down by the Republicans. Congress tried to pass a bill regarding S-CHIP. It was vetoed by pres. Bush. Congress recently held hearings with the top execs of big oil. We still don%26#039;t know what came of that because the media is too busy bashing Hillary and giving a free pass to Obama and McCain. The additional tax refund just about everyone is due to receive in a couple of months, originated in the House of Representatives with Nancy Pelosi and her colleagues. Oh; and the Bush administration owns the housing/mortgage crisis. Don%26#039;t even TRY to blame that on the Dems. When Bill Clinton was president; there WAS no housing crisis.|||people forget that Bush veto%26#039;s things and there aren%26#039;t enough democrates in the white house to override a veto, unless its bush wants it, it doesn%26#039;t happen...|||Wel, they changed issues so much and that Bush stopped tripping over tricycles and other things including his own tongue.
Even though I am a Republican, I am disgusted by both the Republican AND Democratic morons that run this country and the people that vote them in solely on the (R) or (D) after their name.
I am currently learning macroeconomics and am on the chapter of unemployment.
What impact would each of the following have on the full employment unemployment rate?
a.The entry of a large number of young workers into the labor force due to the baby boom echo (the children of baby boomers).
b.A permanent decline in tourism-oriented jobs caused by a fear of traveling due to terrorist threats.
c.A decline in tourism-oriented jobs at hotels, restaurants, and theme parks due to recession.
d.Social Security reform provides senior citizens with an incentive to re-enter the labor force.
Would the following be counted in GDP? If so, explain how it enters GDP (C, I, G, or (X-M)) and why. If not, explain why not.
a.Nabisco鈥檚 purchase of flour to make cookies.
b.Your purchase of flour to make cookies for your study group.
c.The Pentagon鈥檚 purchase of flour to make cookies for soldiers.
d.Nabisco鈥檚 purchase of an oven to bake cookies.
e.Your purchase of Hungarian hazelnuts to put
Someone Please help me in macroeconomics?? I have a test coming up! This is what is goin to be on my test!?finance
Impact on the full employment unemployment rate...
%26quot;Full employment%26quot; reflects the economy running at full capacity with a %26#039;normal%26#039; amount of unemployment due to workers being between jobs. The precise way that you define full employment can influence the answer to this question. A decent discussion of full employment is located in the source section.
Still, let%26#039;s take a crack at the question. You should check your notes and/or course materials carefully. Does your professor tell you that anything that increases the size of the labor force will increase the full employment unemployment rate? If so, then a. and d. both do so.
B does not change the full employment unemployment rate because the issue addresses only one part of the economy. Under full employment, people who decide to spend less money on tourism will spend their money on other goods and services, which will increase employment in those industries and therefore leave the full employment unemployment rate unchanged.
C is easy to answer. A recession is a cyclical contraction of the economy. One of its symptoms is an unemployment rate that exceeds the full employment unemployment rate. So nothing structural has changed to impact the FEUR.
Someone Please help me in macroeconomics?? I have a test coming up! This is what is goin to be on my test!?
loan
a) A large number of workers enters the work forces. More jobs needed, if jobs are available employment rate goes up if no jobs available unemployment rate goes up. b) Job cuts due to terrorist threats. Less jobs will cause increase in unemployment rate and a decrease in employment. c) Job cuts due to recession. Less jobs increase in unemployment rate and decrease in employment. d) Senior citizens enter the work force. (Same as (a)) Your just answering on how will this effect the employment rate/unemployment rate? Will it INCREASE (UN) EMPLOYMENT or will it DECREASE (UN) EMPLOYMENT. Hope this helps... The other question I can not answer because I don%26#039;t know what GDP is? Sorry. Abbrev.%26#039;s for things is not my strong point.
