Economic Recovery: Profits From Overseas Ops Double Fed Ex 1st Qtr Profit – 1700 American Workers To Be Laid Off

FedEx 1Q profit doubles; will cut 1,700 jobs

FedEx Corp. indicated Thursday that the global economic recovery remains uneven. It touted strength in its international shipping operations while moving to fix the weak spot in its business: its money-losing U.S. trucking business.

FedEx did raise its financial outlook for the full fiscal year after its first-quarter net income doubled. But the projections for the second quarter and full year fell shy of Wall Street expectations, and the stock dropped almost 3 percent in premarket trading.

Growth in international air shipments has been driving FedEx’s results lately. That continued in the first quarter. But the FedEx Freight segment lost money again as demand for large items like refrigerators and other appliances continues to be weak. As it competes with other trucking companies to ship a limited amount of freight, FedEx has been forced to forgo the rate increases that are helping its other segments grow.

FedEx will combine its FedEx Freight and FedEx National less-than-truckload operations on Jan. 30, closing 100 facilities and cutting 1,700 workers. FedEx says the move, along with other cost cuts, will ensure the trucking business is profitable next year.

Less-than-truckload shippers take goods from many different manufacturers and consolidate them into a single truck for delivery.

The move suggests that big companies like FedEx, which is a bellwether for broader economic health, are feeling that the global economy still has a way to go for a full recovery.

The world’s second-largest package delivery company now expects to earn between $1.15 and $1.35 per share for the quarter ending in November, below analysts’ expectations of $1.36 per share.

For the full fiscal year that ends in May, the company now expects net income of $4.80 to $5.25 per share. That’s up from its estimate of $4.60 to $5.20 per share in July but some analysts were forecasting earnings as high as $5.60 per share, according to Thomson Reuters.

The Memphis, Tenn., company earned $380 million, or $1.20 per share in the fiscal first-quarter that ended in August, compared with $181 million, or 58 cents per share a year ago. That’s slightly under the $1.21 per share that Wall Street expected.

The reinstatement of some employee compensation programs, higher pension, medical and aircraft maintenance expenses, and a loss at FedEx Freight countered improvements at its Express and Ground operations.

Revenue rose 18 percent to $9.46 billion.

FedEx shares fell 2.9 percent to $83.45 in premarket trading.

http://www.canadianbusiness.com/markets/headline_news/article.jsp?content=b4534970

McAuleys World Comments:

This article is all about what Clinton Labor Secretary Robert Reich would call “The Great Decoupling of Corporate Profits from Jobs”… search for Reich’s article of that name.
Reports of quarterly profits by multinational corporations and a “phantom” recovery in the DJIA is an unreliable indicator of an American economic recovery… the record profits being reported by many DJIA companies have nothing to do with American business operations … Fed Ex being the latest example … There is nothing wrong with Fed Ex or GM posting a profit from overseas operations … the problems arise when the politicos and the press try to claim an “American Recovery” based on business growth in Red China or the Far East … or to claim an American Recovery, that is not only “jobless”, but is based on policies that continue to ship American Jobs and manufacturing capacity overseas ….
Even Clinton’s Labor Secretary Reich noted that $30 billion of the GM “bailout” went to create jobs in Red China before he stated, “GM officials say no American taxpayer money is being used to expand in China. But money is fungible. Because of our generosity, GM can now use the dollars it doesn’t have to spend in the United States meeting its American payrolls and repaying its creditors, for new investments in China.”
Reich went on to say, “GM now sells more cars in China than it does in the US, but makes most of them there. The company now employs 32,000 hourly workers in China. But only 52,000 GM hourly workers remain in the United States – down from 468,000 in 1970.”
My research would indicate that GM now employees 40,000 in China and 48,000 in America. By 2012 GM will employ more people in China than in the US – what are the implications for GM’s pension and medical fund liabilities …
Since Reich’s article was published GM has transferred control of GM-China to the Chinese Government for a 1 time payment of $85 million dollars, shielding any of the GM/China profit from American Taxation …
Profits are not “evil” they are the reason a Company exists … however, quarterly profit announcements are not a reliable indication or “bell weather” of how the US economy has rebounded …
We need to re-examine Governmental policies and stewardship that allows $30 billion dollars of taxpayer money, money intended to “stimulate” the American economy and create American jobs, to be used to expand auto production in China … and then have the Government’s handpicked GM leadership team transfer control of a $30 billion dollar investment for a single $85 million dollar payment from the Chinese Government … GM will sell 2 million cars in China in 2010, GM transferred control of it’s Chinese operations, in perpetuity, for the price of $42.50 per 2010 unit …

August 2010 Employment Numbers: Economy 200,000 jobs short of breakeven point – Unemployment rises to 9.6%

McAuley’s World Comments in Blue:

Companies add 67K workers, but jobless rate rises             AP

Thousands of Job Seekers Attend Job Fair In Detroit (Aug 2010)

WASHINGTON – Private employers hired more workers over the past three months than first thought, a glimmer of hope for the weak economy ahead of the Labor Day weekend. But the unemployment rate rose because not enough jobs were created to absorb the growing number of people looking for work.

Companies added a net total of 67,000 new jobs last month and both July and June’s private-sector job figures were upwardly revised, the Labor Department said Friday. [See my comments below]

Stocks surged after the report’s release. The Dow Jones industrial average rose more than 100 points in afternoon trading and broader indexes were all up. [Yes, after it was reported that 67,000 “net jobs’ were added and not lost … as was expected … wait until Tuesday when the vacation has ended and people return to their offices and digest the “true story” … please read on] ….

….. Overall, the economy lost 54,000 jobs as 114,000 temporary census positions came to an end. For the first time this year, the manufacturing sector lost jobs, down a net total of 27,000 for the month….

http://cbs5.com/wireappolitics/Companies.add.67.2.1894681.html

“Companies added a net total of 67,000 new jobs last month”…. no wait“Overall, the economy lost 54,000 jobs”… you cannot have a “net total increase” and “Overall, lose jobs” at the same time.

 Private companies “allegedly” added 67,000 jobs – there was no “net increase” as the economy, as a whole, lost a “net” of 54,000.

Remember that today, when the press and the Obama Administration claims that jobs have been “added”, the number includes the new “saved or created” concept. After all the numbers were “crunched”, including all the claims of “saved or created” … the economy lost a total of 54,000 jobs in August, there was “zero net jobs gained”. The net loss of 54,000 jobs includes the 67,000 jobs that were allegedly saved or created. But for the claim that there were 67,000 jobs “created or saved” the economy would have lost 114,000 total jobs in August. Once again, there was zero “net job increase” in July 2010.  

 The United States needs to “create” a minimum of 150,000 new jobs, “actual jobs” as opposed to imaginary or “virtual” jobs, each and  every month, to maintain an “employment equilibrium” – to have the economy keep pace with new workers entering the workforce – to have “zero change” in the unemployment rate – no increase – no decrease.  If employers eliminate jobs, the economy must create and equal number of new jobs, in addition to the 150,000 jobs needed to accomodate the new workers entering the work force, just to break even. The U.S. economy needed to create at least 1.2 million new jobs between January and the end of August 2010 to maintain an “employment equilibrium” for 2010. (8 months x 150,000 per month = 1.2 million). We are at least ½ million new jobs short of “employment equilibrium” for 2010 (even when we count all of the claimed “saved or created” nonsense jobs).

Query: With a short fall of ½ million new jobs to date in 2010, ½ million jobs short of keeping pace with new workers entering the workforce, never mind creating jobs to replace those jobs that have been lost, why hasn’t the unemployment rate changed (increased) since January 2010?  The January 2010 unemployment rate was 10%, today the Obama Administration claims our unemployment rate is 9.6%. If we haven’t created enough jobs to maintain an “”employment equilibrium” with the new workers entering the work force, how did our unemployment rate drop?

Example: In August 2010 the economy needed to create 150,000 new jobs to stay even with the number of new workers entering the work force. The economy actually lost 54,000 jobs …. so in August 2010 the economy was a total of 204,000 jobs short of breaking even ( 150,000 new workers entering the work force plus 54,000 jobs that were lost  in the month …).  

 The shortfall of ½ million new jobs means that the economy fell 40% short of creating enough jobs to maintain an “employment equilibrium”, never mind creating enough new  jobs to reduce the unemployment rate.

How has the Obama Administration kept the unemployment rate from rising? (How is the Obama Administration cooking the books?).

1). For every “new worker” who enters the economy without a job being created for them, the Obama Administration claims that 1 unemployed worker gives up their job search and leaves the work force. This is a fraud, but it manufactures  a false “employment equilibrium” for the press to report.

2). When the Obama Administration claims to “save” a job, the “save” can be a monthly event – a single individual working for a single employer can have the same job “saved” up to 12 times in a year. Not 12 jobs, 1 job 12 times. When 12 jobs are lost you cannot create a true “employment equilibrium” by saving 1 job 12 times, because that still leaves 11 unemployed people.

 Do I smell something burning… are those numbers done yet … shouldn’t someone stop cooking the numbers and look for some real solutions?

While I was reading various blogs today I noted an amazing number of wild claims about unemployment during G. W. Bush’s Presidency … these are the true facts and not some wild political claims:

Average Annual Unemployment Under G.W. Bush – all 8 years – 5.2 %

Highest Annual Unemployment Rate During G.W. Bush: 5.99 (2003)

Lowest Annual Unemployment Rate During G.W. Bush: 4.61 (2007) Just before the Democrats took over Congress …

B. OBAMA’S ANNUAL UNEMPLOYEMNT RATES:       2009   –  9.2%

                                                                                      Jan – Aug  2010   –  9.6%      

http://www.miseryindex.us/urbyyear.asp

Unemployment Numbers Hit 9 Month High – 500,000 File New Unemployment Claims

Employers appear to be laying off workers again as applications for unemployment insurance reached the half-million mark last week for the first time since November. Initial claims for jobless benefits rose by 12,000 last week to 500,000, the Labor Department said Thursday.

It was the fourth increase in the past five weeks and evidence that the economic recovery has weakened. Homebuilders and other construction firms are laying off more workers as the housing sector slumps after the expiration of a popular homebuyers’ tax credit. State and local governments are also cutting jobs to close large budget gaps.

“This is obviously a disappointing number that shows ongoing weakness in the job market,” said Robert Dye, senior economist at the PNC Financial Services Group. The four-week average, a less volatile measure, rose by 8,000 to 482,500, the highest since December.

The increase suggests the economy is creating even fewer jobs than in the first half of this year, when private employers added an average of about 100,000 jobs per month. That’s barely enough to keep the unemployment rate from rising. The jobless rate has been stuck at 9.5 percent for two months. Stock futures fell on the prospects of more layoffs.

Dow Jones industrial average futures had risen by 50 points before the report was released. They dropped immediately afterward and were down six points shortly before the market opened.

Jobless claims declined steadily last year from a peak of 651,000 in March 2009 as the economy recovered from the worst downturn since the 1930s. After flattening out earlier this year claims have begun to grow again. Dye said that claims showed a similar pattern in the last two recoveries, but eventually began to fall again.

The current elevated level of claims is a sign employers are reluctant to hire until the rebound is well under way. That’s what happened in the recoveries following the 1991 and 2001 recessions, which were dubbed “jobless recoveries.”

The number of people continuing to receive benefits fell by 13,000 to 4.5 million, the department said. The continuing claims data lags initial claims by one week. But that doesn’t include millions of people receiving extended unemployment insurance, paid for by the federal government.

About 5.6 million unemployed workers were on the extended unemployment benefit rolls, as of the week ending July 31, the latest data available. That’s an increase of about 300,000 from the previous week.

During the recession, Congress added up to 73 extra weeks of benefits on top of the 26 weeks customarily provided by the states. The number of people on the extended rolls has increased sharply in recent weeks after Congress renewed the extended program last month.

It had expired in June.

Private employers added only 71,000 jobs in July. But that increase was offset by the loss of 202,000 government jobs, including 143,000 temporary census positions. July marked the third straight month that the private sector hired cautiously.

Economists are concerned that the unemployment rate will start rising again because overall economic growth has weakened significantly since the start of the year. In a healthy economy, jobless claims usually drop below 400,000. But the recent increases in claims provide further evidence that the economy has slowed and could slip back into a recession.

Many analysts are worried that economic growth will ebb further in the second half of this year. After growing at a 3.7 percent annual rate in the first quarter, the economy’s growth slowed to 2.4 percent in the April-to-June period.

Some economists forecast it will drop to as low as 1.5 percent in the second half of this year.

http://www.nydailynews.com/money/2010/08/19/2010-08-19_half_a_million_are_jobless_unemployment_numbers_hit_9month_high.html#ixzz0x43i6hde

G.M. Uses Taxpayer Bailout Funds To Build New Mexican Auto Plant

GM to Build New Vehicle at Plant in Mexico

Will invest $500 million at plant in Ramos Arispe

General Motors will invest $500 million to produce a new vehicle and eight-cylinder engines in a plant in northeastern Mexico, a company spokesman said on August 4.

The decision was announced at a meeting on August 3 between GM management and Mexican officials, the spokesman said, without giving details of the new vehicle.

The investment in the GM plant in Ramos Arispe, Coahuila state, would generate 390 jobs, he added.

General Motors has been present in Mexico since 1935, where it has some 11,000 workers, four factories, an engineering center and a test circuit.

Copyright Agence France-Presse, 2010

http://www.industryweek.com/articles/gm_to_build_new_vehicle__at_plant_in_mexico_22462.aspx

GM’s investments in Mexico have been dwarfed by GM’s investment in Red China … GM has redirected “GM Bailout cash” into expanding production and facilities in Red China – rather then refurbishing American auto plants – GM Prepares IPO While UAW Jobs Continue Exodus To Red China

Congress, The Deficit, Your 401K, Obama Care,The Gulf, Immigration, Taxes, Foreclosures and Unemployment: “I’m Mad As Hell And I’m Not Going To Take It Anymore”

The movie is 1976’s  “Network”. The actor, Peter Finch, playing news anchor Howard Beal, won a posthumous Academy Award for Best Actor. 

Yes, life imitates art.

Peter Finch as Howard Beal - NETWORK - 1976

Its not 1976 anymore, it is 2010 and today our window is the internet ………..  America ushered in a “Revolution” in 1980  …..

see one of the architects of that revolution here: https://mcauleysworld.wordpress.com/2010/06/28/freedom-misery-tyranny-the-federal-deficit-professor-milton-friedman/

May 2010 Jobs Report – Econcomy Is Still Losing Ground – Job Creation Isn’t Keeping Pace With The Number Of New Workers

The following is being reported by the Associated Press:

“The government also said 431,000 jobs overall were created last month, but most of those jobs, 411,000, came from the government’s hiring of temporary census workers. The overall number also fell short of expectations. Economists polled by Thomson Reuters had forecast employers would add 513,000 jobs.” http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100604/ap_on_bi_st_ma_re/us_wall_street  http://www.heritage.org/Research/Reports/2010/06/Heritage-Employment-Report-May-Jobs-Struggle-to-Appear

The straight forward math is this, private employers added 20,000 (20 thousand) employees last month when a gain of 513,000 was expected. Over the next 60 days, the 411,000 part time census workers will rejoin the ranks of the unemployed. Last month’s (April 2010) job hires were largely due to “temporary summer hires”.

The Obama Adminiistration is claiming that the unemployment rate has dropped from 9.8% to 9.7% – a drop that isn’t being related to temporary hiring (becasue if it was related to temporary hiring – then the Obama Administration would need to report an increase in the unemployment rate after the people are “laid off” from their temporaray work)  the “lower” unemployement number is being related to the fact that “300,000 people have given up on their job searchs”.

Please note that the Government does not count an individual who has exhausted their unemployment benefits as being “unemployed”.

In our recent past the Liberal Media has reported that it takes between 150,000 and 200,000 new jobs each and every month to keep up with population growth – any “private job” creation number below that means the economy is shrinking. These statements are correct. 

With only 21,000 jobs created by private employers in May 2010, we are somewhere between 130,000 and 180,000 jobs short of breaking even for the month.

Personally, I find it surprising that no media outlet has pointed out that, over the last 6 months, the Obama Adminstration has reported that the usual “growth” in the number of individuals entering the “job market” has been off set by an equal number of people “giving up their job searches”. What a remarkable coincidence! 

Read and compare these historical statements from our liberal media: 

  •  The New York Times, 08/08/03: The economy must add about 150,000 jobs or more each month to keep up with population growth and bring down the jobless rate over a long period of time. In the 1990’s, the economy created an average of 181,000 jobs a month.  http://www.nytimes.com/2003/11/08/business/08ECON.html?pagewanted=2 
  • The San Francisco Examiner – April 3, 2004: Total jobs outside the farm sector soared by 308,000, the Labor Department reported Friday, the unemployment rate rose to 5.7 percent from 5.6 percent in February primarily because 179,000 people entered the labor force. (A net gain of 129,000 jobs and the unemployment rate went up) http://articles.sfgate.com/2004-04-03/news/17423578_1_worst-job-recovery-job-growth-labor-market
  • Washinton Post 09/04/04 : Employers added 144,000 jobs to their non-farm payrolls in August on a seasonally adjusted basis, an improvement after two months in which job growth essentially stalled, but barely enough to keep pace with population growth. http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A60680-2004Sep3?language=printer
  • The Los Angles Times 09/04/04: U.S. employers added a net 144,000 jobs to their payrolls in August and the nation’s unemployment rate dropped a notch to 5.4% (WOW – 5.4%, not 9.9%) –  Unless employment growth averages 228,250 a month from September through December, Bush will be the first post-Depression president to finish his term with fewer jobs than when he started. http://articles.latimes.com/2004/sep/04/business/fi-jobs4
  • The Boston Globe 01/08/05: US employers boosted payrolls by 157,000 jobs in December, keeping the economy on a path of moderate expansion and completing the first year of job growth since 2000. The month’s job gains were slightly less than analysts expected, and just enough to keep up with the natural growth of the labor force and prevent unemployment from rising.  Over the past year, the economy has averaged 186,000 new jobs a month, and whittled three-tenths of a point from the December 2003 unemployment rate of 5.7 percent. All told, the nation added a net 2.2 million jobs last year, the most since 1999, when the economy created 3.2 million. http://www.boston.com/business/globe/articles/2005/01/08/us_gains_157000_jobs_in_december/

Until the Obama Adminstration admits we are not on course for a recovery, the proper corrective measures will not be taken.

“Spinning” the numbers doesn’t help the average Amercian or improve our economy …..

We were promised that if the “Stimulus Plan” was passed the unemployment rate would not rise above 8%, and that millions of new jobs would be created in the “private sector”. Reuters reported that the Country lost over 3 million jobs in the 1st 10 months after the “stimulus” was signed 18 months ago. http://www.forbes.com/feeds/afx/2009/10/30/afx7069921.html

The New York Times has reported that the “total number of jobs lost” through the 1st of this year is 8 million. http://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/04/weekinreview/04norris.html?_r=2&scp=2&sq=floyd&st=cse

Between the start of the recession and the 1st of Janauary 2010 a total of 8.1 million jobs were lost.   http://www.epi.org/publications/entry/jobs_picture_20100108/

At the end of January 2010, the U.S. Government’s Bureau of Labor Statistics reported that the number of “jobs lost” had increased to 8.4 million.  http://dailycaller.com/2010/02/08/unemployment-drops-while-total-jobs-lost-increases/ 

On that same day, the Obama Administration reported that the unemployment rate dropped from 10% to 9.7 %. This happened despite the fact that the Administration reported that they had “overestimated job creation” by over 800,000 jobs. We lost 800,000 jobs and the unemployment rate dropped from 10% to 9.7%.  http://money.cnn.com/2010/02/04/news/economy/jobs_outlook/

In March 2010 the BLS reported a loss of 20,000 jobs in February 2010. A loss of 20,000 jobs would mean that the US was between 170,000 and 220,000 jobs short of breaking even in February 2010. The “official” unemployment rate remained “unchanged”. http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/breaking/2010/0303/breaking54.html

In April 2010 the Bureau of Labor Statistics reported that 162,000 jobs were created in March 2010. Temporary census jobs counted for 48,000 of the jobs while 114,000 were in the private sector. The 114,000 “private sector” jobs were certainly a welcome sign, but the number of new jobs were 50,000 jobs below the number needed to “break even” for the month. The “official” unemployment rate remained unchanged.  http://www.employmentmetrix.com/blog/2010/04/good-news-for-job-seekers-march-jobs-report-shows-growth.html?no_prefetch=1

The report for May 2010, which was relased today, is discussed above. (411,000 of 431,000 jobs created are temporary census jobs). The 20.000 jobs created in the private sector falls far short of the 150,000 to 200,000 needed to break even for the month, however, we are told that the unemployment rate dropped from 9.8% to 9.7% because 300,000 “unemployed” workers stopped looking for work.

Exactly where are these 300,000 unemployed workers who suddenly gave up on finding work? What a surpise! A 6th straight month where the “job creation numbers” fall short of the “break even point” without a single increase in the “unemployment rate”.  

I’m sorry, I don’t believe it for a minute. These numbers are more thoroughly cooked than my Christmas Goose!   

If an individual has “access” to unemployment benefits they must report that they are “able, available and seeking” work …… in order to collect benefits. 

It appears that the number of “lay-offs” per month may have returned to pre-recession levels, however, new job creation is not keeping pace with the natural and historical growth in the Country’s labor pool. If “job creation” isn’t keeping pace with the natural growth rate of the “labor pool” we should be seeing, as we have always seen in the past, an increase in the monthly unemployment rate.  http://www.heritage.org/Research/Reports/2010/06/Heritage-Employment-Report-May-Jobs-Struggle-to-Appear

The economy is not in recovery and if the books were not being cooked, the unemployment rate would be rising.

When President Obama says “our economic policies are working” and “we are heading in the right direction” he is either in self denial or he is, as is claimed, more interested in “spinning” the facts for his personal poltical benefit than he is interested in helping working Americans, or more imporantly, helping those Americans who wish they were working.

For a comparison of the average annual unemployment rates during the George W Bush Presidency and our 1st 18 months under Barack Obama (Chart of average annual unemployment rates from 1948 through 2009) see: http://www.miseryindex.us/URbyyear.asp?StartYear=1948&EndYear=2009

Economic Recovery on Tax Day 2010? In The 4th Year of Democratic Control Of Congress – Unemployment And Home Foreclosures Continue To Soar

“The worst economy on our lifetime” screamed the Democratic political ads back in 2005 as we moved towards the 2006 election when the Democrats took control of both Houses of Congress. http://uspolitics.about.com/od/usgovernment/l/bl_party_division_2.htm

After winning control of Congress the Democrats acellerated Government spending and the reckless mortgage practices of Fannie & Freddie.

The month before the Democrats took control of Congress in November 2006 the National unemployment rate stood at  4.4%. http://www.laworks.net/Downloads/LMI/Data_for_November_2006.pdf

The aveage unemployment rate during Bush’s 8 years as President was 4.8%.

Unemployment stands at 9.7% today (04-15-2010) and 1st time unemployment claims continues to set records and remains above 425,000 first time claims, week after week. (Jobless Claims Rise to 484,000 First-Time Claims, Associated Press: Jobs are still hard to come by as first-time requests for jobless benefits rose to 484,000 last week. http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/04/15/jobless-claims-rise-time-claims/?loomia_ow=t0:s0:a4:g4:r2:c0.000000:b0:z5 ) 

Mortgage foreclosures continue at a record pace. (Foreclosure Rates Surge, Biggest Jump in 5 Years.  Associated Press: A record number of U.S. homes were lost to foreclosure in the first three months of this year, a sign banks are starting to wade through the backlog of troubled home loans at a faster pace. http://www.foxnews.com/us/2010/04/15/foreclosure-rates-surge-biggest-jump-years/?loomia_ow=t0:s0:a4:g4:r3:c0.000000:b0:z5 )

Nearly two years ago Obama launched his $75 Billion Dollar mortgage program during a speech in Nevada. The President promised his program would help 9 million American Homeowners. To date less than 100,000 familes have been helped at a cost to taxpayers of more than $1 million per mortgage. 1 out of every 33 houses in Nevada has received a foreclosure notice in 2010. In a normal suburban neighborhood that means 8 to 10 houses on every street are in foreclosure. In November 2006 one out of every 389 households in Nevada were in foreclosure. 1 in 33 versus 1 in 389? http://efinancedirectory.com/articles/Home_Foreclosures_Increase_Across_the_Nation.html   http://www.foxnews.com/us/2010/04/15/foreclosure-rates-surge-biggest-jump-years/?loomia_ow=t0:s0:a4:g4:r3:c0.000000:b0:z5

Nationwide, one home in every 759 was in foreclosure in November 2006, and that number represented a doubling of the number in foreclosure in 2005 (1 home in every 1500 in 2005 – but would Congress listen when the Regulators warned about Fannie & Freddie – heck no – the Congresspeople claimed the “Regulators” findings were racially motivated and biased …. Congress played the race card rather than face facts). How does the 2006 foreclosure rate of 1 home out of every 759 compare with today? “In all, more than 900,000 households, or one in every 138 homes, received a foreclosure-related notice, in the first 3 months of 2010, RealtyTrac said. The firm based in Irvine, Calif., tracks notices for defaults, scheduled home auctions and home repossessions”. http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2010/04/15/business/main6398303.shtml

For every 1 home foreclosure in 2006 there are 6 home foreclosures in 2010. 

At the current rate 9 million homes will face foreclosure by 2012. http://minnesotaindependent.com/39184/nine-million-foreclosed-homes-by-2012

Didn’t the Obama Adminstration tell us that an economic recovery was dependent on a recovery in the housing market? http://www.silvar.org/index.cfm/article_392.htm   Wait a minute, wasn’t an economic recovery dependent on the auto industry? http://change.gov/agenda/economy_agenda/ , or pension relief , http://www.necanet.org/index.cfm?fa=newsAboutNecaItem&articleID=4210 and of course, we can’t have a recovery without a Government take over of health care …….     

As the Democrats “feed” the Government with your tax dollars it continues to grow and as Government grows so does the unemployment rate and the number of homes in foreclosure ……\

The Democrats have been leading us down this path since 2006 …… now they are running down that  path at full speed ……. running with their eyes closed and at full speed …..

By the way …. has anyone else noticed the strange coincidence that seems to occur month after month …..  that the Administration saves or creates just enough jobs that when the number of jobs “saved” is combined with the “number of unemployed Americans who give up looking for work” – that the unemployment rate remains constant. Week after week, we have 400,000 plus new unemployment claims and yet the unemployment rate remains stuck at 9.7%.

Yeah, I believe it is just a coincidence.

Wait, let me guess …. it is all George’s fault ……….. George was in office for 8 years and the Democrats have been “in charge” the last 4. Yeah, blame it on George ….. don’t take any responsibility but please admit the obvious – you’ve been in charge the last 4 years and things have gotten a heck of a lot worse …..

%d bloggers like this: