Saturday, July 25, 2009


Politics Daily
"Traditionally, as the economy gathers momentum after a recession, jobs are slow to bounce back, a lagging indicator in economic lingo. What is difficult to figure this time around – and Summers acknowledges that there is not yet enough data to make a determination – is how reluctant businesses will be to hire new workers. It can be argued that because the layoffs were so much faster and graver than the economic models would suggest, the recovery in jobs will be equally accelerated. But there is also the more alarming prospect that companies are growing adept at doing more with fewer workers (the equivalent of an old-fashioned speed-up on the assembly line) – and that this largely may be a jobless recovery." (highlights added)

I'm really confused at this point. If 70% of our GDP is based on consumer spending, how can a jobless recovery be a recovery at all? People without jobs don't spend money. People that know people without jobs are not going to spend more than they have to, either. Perception becomes reality. Unless of course, the main concern of Summers and the rest of the elite is to see that the bankers recover, that their balance sheets become healthy once again. Just as the left constantly chided the Bush administration, and rightfully so, because there seemed to be no clear definition of victory in the war on terror; perhaps the Obama administration needs to define for us exactly what they consider a recovery to be, provide a clear definition of victory in the war against the collapsing economy.

No comments:

Post a Comment