BloggeRhythms

Flipping channels this morning, I caught a few minutes of Maria Bartiromo’s show on the Fox business network. She was talking to the head of a major Philadelphia bank about his expectations for the economy. Unfortunately, I didn’t catch his name.

 

I mention him, because although his approach was quite casual and completely apolitical, he matter-of-factly expressed his opinion about the economy’s future performance and his plans for his institution's investments.

 

Without making any endorsements of any candidates, or any specific statements about policy, he said he expected the stock-market to rise significantly. He also thinks costs of fuel will greatly reduce stimulating travel, transportation of goods and materials, and leaving consumers more money to spend on other needed items, stimulating the economy even further.

 

He also believes regulation will slacken, making business growth and investment greater which, in turn, will boost the overall economy even further, while helping the government increase tax revenue and lower the deficit.

 

As he continued to paint a picture of the nation’s rebound and all the positive things her guest was predicting, Ms Bartiromo finally asked him why he felt so certain about an economically healthy future. His reply was that he was certain there would be a Republican takeover of the Senate, along with their retaining the House.

 

Therefore, my question for today is that since there’s no doubt that the Philadelphia banker’s correct in his predictions and expected economic results, what is about Democrats that makes them despise success to the extent that they’ll kill the nation’s productivity to bring everyone else down to their level of misery and abject failure?    

 

Then again, although knowing that they’ve decimated the nation’s financial performance, Democrat’s continue trying to convince the voting public that things are better today than they were in 2008.

 

In that regard, Dem’s are touting yesterday’s unemployment rate which reduced to 5.9%, the lowest print since the summer of 2008. However, that’s primarily because the administration changed the formula, eliminating those out of the work force because they’ve simply given up their job search.

 

Therefore, to get a true picture you have to look at what the Bureau of Labor Statistics calls "U-6," which includes the "total unemployed, plus all marginally attached workers plus total employed part time for economic reasons, as a percent of all civilian labor force plus all marginally attached workers." And although that rate fell in September to 11.8 percent, double the government's newly devised rate, it’s the first time it was below 12% since October 2008.

 

Furthermore, aside from a politically favorable change in the unemployment rate calculation method producing an artificially lower number, the labor force participation rate has also collapsed. It slid from an already three decade low 62.8% to 62.7% in September, the lowest in over 36 years, matching February 1978 lows. And while according to the Household Survey, 232,000 people found jobs, what is more disturbing is that the people not in the labor force, rose to a new record high, increasing by 315,000 to 92.6 million.

 

So, the problem the Democrats have at the moment is that no matter how they try to manipulate data and statistics, the real-world results indicate something else. And just like the banker from Philadelphia this morning explained, when they go to the voting booths folks aren’t going to think about or remember manipulated political gibberish, they’re going to elect candidates they believe are going to make things better for them in the real world.

 

That’s it for today folks.

 

Adios