[Info-vax] AXIS2/C, gSOAP

[George Cook]

In article <i3rc5p$meh$1 at lnx107.hrz.tu-darmstadt.de>, m.kraemer at gsi.de (Michael Kraemer) writes:
> In article <nCdNUFTL7zg0 at wvnvms>, cook at wvnvms.wvnet.edu (George Cook) writes:
> 
>> 
>> The second quarter US GDP growth rate of 2.4% resulted in a 131,000
>> job loss.  2.4% is far too little to reduce the underemployment rate
>> of 16.5%.  The third quarter rate is expected to be even lower which
>> will result in the unemployment rate rising above the current 9.5%.
>> 
>> The first quarter 3.7% GDP growth rate was barely enough to start
>> putting a dent in umemployment.  Unfortunately, the current
>> administration has pursued very anti-growth policies, so high
>> umemployment will continue for the foreseeable future.
>> 
> 
> Your own numbers show that GDP growth has little
> relation to employment. So why do you blame your 
> government for not growing the GDP?
> And, btw, 9.5% unemployment rate is still slightly higher
> than what we have over here in what you call "socialist Germany".

Some day I may learn to stay out of these discussions.  Getting
down in the statistical weeds usually does little more than prove
that there are three types of lies, "Lies, damned lies and statistics."
For example, I conveniently didn't mention that the 131,000 loss
(I accidentally left off "for the month of July") included a 71,000
private sector job gain.  So, yes, a 2.4% growth rate did produce
a small private sector job gain just as one would expect, however
that 71,000 stat is very likely to be revised downward to about
40,000 in a month's time just as the June figures were just revised
downward by about half.  The GDP rate is also likely to be revised
downward.

The 3.7% GDP growth did result in 200,000-300,000 monthly job grow.
The problem is that the US economy needs nearly 200,000 jobs created
each month just to hold the unemployment rate steady (ignoring many
other factors - a lot of weeds here).  Even if the economy added
300,000/month, it would take years to reach full employment of 5%.
500,000+/month (requires a GDP growth rate of 5%+) is needed to
quickly return to full employment.

It's apples and oranges trying to compare the US and Germany's
unemployment rate.  Germany appears to have a structural rate of
nearly 7% while the US structural rate is around 5%, so Germany's
recent rates around 7.5% are only a little above full employment.
The "true" US unemployment rate of ~15% (includes those who want
a job but have given up trying to find one) is way above full
employment.

Obama's anti-growth policies have worked so well, that even the
Federal Reserve is predicting that unemployment will rise to
10% by the end of the year.  Unbelieveably, Freddie Mac and Fannie
Mae have once again been pushing mortgages (with as little as a
$1000 down) to people who will be unable to pay them, so another
housing bubble is a real risk. I didn't think (hoped) that we
would ever have a President more incompetent than Carter, but
unfortunately I was wrong.

>From Wikipedia: "The Germans proudly label their economy a 'soziale
Marktwirtschaft,' or 'social market economy'", so I don't feel like
I was inaccurate if I used the term "socialist Germany".

 
George Cook