(Update: New numbers have come out indicating cuts are 88 billion, not the 120 we heard last night. In that case the difference between the original Senate and the Gang of four compromise would be 951,000.)
The bottom line on the changes demanded by "centrist" gang of four Senators Collins, Specter, Lieberman and Nelson is that the compromise Senate bill will create about 728,143 fewer jobs less than the House bill. This is a back on the envelope figure and very rough, but if anything it should be a slight underestimate. If you compare the compromised Senate Bill to the pre-gang Senate bill, it comes out to 1,271,000 fewer jobs.
Friday night during the stimulus debate Senator Ben Nelson (D-Neb) said that:
"Our plan pares back a very substantial amount of money that we believed didn’t belong in the bill. Didn’t belong in a bill that was designed to fix our economy called a stimulus package.
Now if we looked at these proposals many of them will work well in a budget or in another bill.
But we just didn’t think that they deserved to be in this particular bill which was about jobs, jobs, jobs. Now if we ask taxpayers to support it as we are, they deserve to get the biggest bang for their buck. The remaining plan will generate new jobs, save jobs and expands job opportunities all across America as it also boosts our economy."
Clearly, Ben Nelson doesn’t know what he’s talking about. Worse than that, White House Press Officer Robert Gibbs then congratulated Nelson and co. for gutting the bill:
On the day when we learned 3.6 million people have lost their jobs since this recession began, we are pleased the process is moving forward and we are closer to getting Americans a plan to create millions of jobs and get people back to work
Here are the assumptions and the math.
The Senate Bill is apparently $780 billion, 42% is tax cut, 58% spending. That means tax cuts are: $327.6 billion. Spending is $452.4
The House Bill was $819 billion. Of that $275 billion were tax cuts. Spending was $544 billion.
According to the CBO $140,000 of GDP means one job created. However different types of stimulus have different GDP multipliers. In general tax cuts, especially tax cuts like the AMT fix put into the Senate bill, have lower GDP multipliers. For the purposes of this analysis let’s assume that tax cuts have a .5 GDP multiplier. For spending we’ll assume a 1.4 multiplier, which is probably slightly low since, for example, food stamps appear to have been cut out of the bill and they have a 1.7+ multiplier.
The tax cut increases will increase job creation. Total tax cut increase is $52.6 billion. $52.6 billion/140,000×0.5 jobs = 187,857 jobs created.
The spending cuts will decrease job creation. Total spending cuts are $91.6 billion. $91.6 billion/140,000×1.4 = 916,000 job losses.
Add job gains to job losses and you get a net loss of 728,143 jobs.
We (Scarecrow) also compared the Gang of Four Compromise to the Senate Bill before the compromise. If we assume the Gang of Four stripped out $120 billion of spending and $20 billion of tax cuts (total of $140 billion reduction), and assumed multiplier effects of 1.4 and 0.5 respectively, then the total reduction in GDP would be $178 billion.
Using the CBO ratio of one job per $140,000 GDP, that means that "compromising" Senators managed to cut 1,271,000 jobs from the Senate stimulus package. In other words, the Gang of Four would lose even more jobs than the country has lost in the last two months, two of the highest job loss months on record.
Either way you look at it, the "moderates" now have the power to control whatever goes through the Senate. On Friday they used that power to deny Americans between three-quarters and one and a quarter million jobs.
Do note that these are rough figures. We’re using rough averages from the chart below, and assuming most tax cuts added are short term. If long term tax cuts are included, push that multiplier to .75 which reduces job losses by about another 93,929, meaning a bottom line figure of 634,2143 compared to the House bill.
(End Notes: To make these numbers comparable to Krugman’s or Dean Baker’s, just divide by two.)
Related posts:
- Eric Cantor Says Stimulus Bill Failed, Except That Whole Creating Jobs in His Home State Part
- NYT Can’t Recall that Republicans Who Demand “Where Are the Jobs?” All Voted Against the Stimulus
- Boehner Enlists Bloodhound to Look for Stimulus Jobs, Forgets They’re in His Home State
- CBO Scores Senate Bill, Would Reduce Deficit $127 Billion in 10 Years
- Biden to Smack Boehner Around on Stimulus
Spotlight
Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About Firedoglake
Advanced search
Thanks Dems. not really. twits.
small typo with big ramifications: 3 to 4
bmillion jobs.thanks ian, another extremely helpful post.
Someone made an interesting observation in comments last night about the 42% tax cut vs 58% spending… it lines up in a near perfect der/rep senate ratio.
Now I think someone should bring forth an amendment which says if you vote no, your state gets neither tax cuts or stimulus money. /s
Well done Ian (and Scarecrow).
I posted an Oxdown on the possibility that the Infrastructure Bank may have been slipped into the Senate version. Have you come across that? I’m still trying to confirm it.
http://oxdown.firedoglake.com/diary/3520
I would like to confirm if it has been slipped in and would like to follow-up with more dialogue about it if it has.
So much for Ben “jobs jobs jobs” Nelson.
Spotlight this post.
Ian,
Sort of OT,
Our bank modified our mortgage and it may mean that we can stay in the house. My husband just suggested that perhaps they cannot find the paper work and this is how they are getting us back into the system. Is this a reasonable thought?
We feel lucky and suspicious.
Worse than that, White House Press Officer Robert Gibbs then congratulated Nelson and co. for gutting the bill
Mmmmm. New kind of politics. So much better.
Know what’s really sick? The Republicans are still attacking the bill. Tooth and nail. I had the displeasure of listening to idiots like Jon Kyl on NPR today rant about the thing.
Of course, we all know what they’re really afraid of: That the bill still has enough actual stimulus in it to work — and that Americans will understand that it was the stimulus and not the GOP’s cherished tax cuts that made it work.
Back in 1993, Bill Kristol said flat-out that Republicans had to kill healthcare reform because getting it would cause voters to move away from the Republicans. That’s why they either have to kill the stimulus bill or try to rig it so they can falsely claim that it was the crap they added that made the bill work.
Way below, where Mz. Hamsher was live blogging the senate, Mary McCurnin posted something that blew my mind, and I just feel I have to repost it, and my reply to Mary. Sorry to go OT, but, I want Mary to KNOW how moved I was with her words, so here it is:
“Health, education, and welfare of the citizens is THE most important function of a culture/government.”
Mary, one of the most succinct and exact descriptions of what I believe in I’ve ever seen.
I bow to your wow. That was beautiful and should be stapled to the forehead of every Pub asshat in the nation.
It’s so simply spot on that it resonates, radiates and glows like the lights of our souls. Those words are golden in their sheen. I’m incredibly moved by them.
Thank you.
Why did Obama nickname this crew The Job Squad?
Sounds like The No-Job Squad to me.
Ian, a great post. And, perhaps this info just needs to be sent to every Dem in the nation, at every level.
And phones and emails of outrage to every MSM radio, tv and print source in the nation.
And then, the same to Obama, and the WH website. While we’re at it, we may as well start asking Mr. Obama when he plans to dismiss Rahm Emanuel for treason against the citizenry.
Harumph.
Because they let this thing get tagged as the “stimulus bill” until it was too late and they realized an abstract term like “stimulus” just didn’t get anyone but economists all revved up?
i don’t think the bill – as i now understand it – will “work.”
what the republicans are now doing is theater. circuses. they are freaky batshit crazy and like a moth to a flame i keep watching too. but i shouldn’t be, because it’s a distraction. what stands between us and sane policies right now is not the republican party – its the democrats who now control both houses of congress and the presidency.
Thanks Selise.
By Spring, the federal government is going to need to hire Americans to dig holes and other Americans to fill them up again. Too bad Senators won’t be available for that pure Keynesian magic — too busy debating more silliness, no doubt.
Don’t know. But if it works for you, that’s what matters.
Mary, I’ve read recently that one thing homeowners in default MUST do to help themselves is to DEMAND THE ORIGINAL NOTE!!!
Because so many loans have been resold so often the original paperwork is often non-existent anymore.
Hence, a HUGE loophole in favor of the homeowner(s) in their fight and hopes to keep their places.
Just a thought . . . .
I think you’re about right. They might be more afraid that it will be perceived to have worked. I don’t think they’re actually trying to cause a depression – they just believe their own propaganda so much that they think they’re doing us a big favor. Yes, they strike me as that dumb. Certainly their rhetoric has been that dumb.
What’s striking about that $140b diffference Ian and Scarecrow are talking about is that most of it came from what is generally acknowledged to be the more effective way of creating jobs. This economy clearly needs more spending now, and it’s not going to get it if people can’t find jobs. Pretty simple really. The Four Clowns cut the kind of money that would work the best. Want to bet that $20b in tax cuts comes out of our pockets, too? They’re still playing the old game after the rules were changed. In the end it will probably burn them, but they’re going to take quite a few of us with them.
Before what these jackasses have done to us is over, I’ll probably be past retirement age.
Might have been more politically sensible to call it a “jobs bill”, although that wouldn’t have been terribly accurate.
It would be nice if their carelessness worked in our favor for once. I suspect Congress would close that loophole quickly if it got too popular, though.
They’re probably going to filibuster the thing, so yes, it’s the Republicans who stand in the way here. The whole reason all the tax cuts were put in were to try and keep the Republicans for killing the bill with a filibuster. Remember, the Democrats don’t have Al Franken in yet — if he was in, the GOP’s filibuster threat would have a lot less teeth. (Why do you think Norm Coleman’s been burning millions of dollars on his hundred-lawyer horde these past few months, even though every sane legal expert agrees his challenge is doomed?)
Hey, if the window’s open our free spirits should soar, ya think? *G*
I think it is time to call The Four Compromisers of the Apocalypse idiots very loudly!
am i wrong that it only takes a simple majority to rewrite the senate rules? that the 110th congress could have rewritten the filibuster rule?
I’ve read dozens of opinions about each of several versions of the stimulus bill and none of them agree about much…
Between Obama trying to work in all of his campaign promises for tax cuts and infrastructure et al- and congresses contributions- we probably have a severely suboptimized bill…
Still- I say pass the fucker- improve it in committee- and then do add ons as necessary.
Do we know how many of the tax cuts are for small businesses of “under 100″ employees?
Should the filibuster go away- it would probably go away for good. There will be times in the future when we may need it badly.
Mary, in most states a home loan is evidenced by two documents: the mortgage and the note. The original mortgage is filed in the County Clerk’s public records and copies may be obtained at minimal costs. Call or go and ask.
The note is “negotiable paper” like money and is marked and signed by a notary to correspond with the mortgage. (Latin “Paraphed ne Varietur”) The note is what is sold, over and over, sometimes.
The note must be produced to cancel the mortgage in the public records. The note must be produced to modify the mortgage or file for foreclosure. If the note is lost the “Holder” must file a lawsuit at his expense in order to take any action.
My local gooper rag came out today in favor of eliminating the corporate income tax as the most important stimulus measure available. Guess they think if the corporate taxes go away, the corporations will build more plants and equipment even though the are only using a small portion of their current plant capacity.
Sometimes I wonder what goopers eat- to get so stupid.
Thers at Whiskey Fire. His snark is teh awesome at times:
“There’s about as much point to Collins as there is to dinosaur tits.”
Here’s the thread.
And here’s Greg Sargeant’s original piece.
I think the idea that this is Coleman’s last chance at a statewide office in Minnesota is enough to explain his motivations. His donors are the sort of people who would oppose a liberal in office on general principles. There’s an extremely small chance he could cause enough fuss to prompt a special election, so he (and they) will take it. At least, that’s my theory.
Despite my overt cynicism, I suspect that banks would be happy to have high employment. If we had it, we’d be putting our money in their banks and using their credit cards to buy things.
no nuclear option required. it doesn’t have to go away – and i wouldn’t want it to. my point is that the rule could be re-written to something different. for example, 40 senators could extend debate but only by taking without break. or that only 55 senators would been needed for a cloture vote.
i like the idea of a filibuster – but not the one we currently have which apparently is only available to republicans.
Well, according to this opinion piece in today’s WaPo0 and this from the NY Times, Small Business owners aren’t too awfully pleased about the Stimulus, especially the Tax Cuts. They’d prefer to have something that brings cash to the till.
IT makes you just want to “bitch slap” them.
There is some logic to that, but I don’t think it applies here. The best time to modernize or alter factories is when they’re not busy. The production lost is comparatively low. The problem is that cutting the corporate income tax is designed to create capital. There’s capital already, the banks just aren’t lending it out. If I were a bank right now, and someone asked me for a loan to retool a factory, the first question I’d have to ask myself is “Will they have enough business to be able to repay this loan?” If the answer to that is no, they won’t lend the money. I doubt what corporations save by having no income tax would make up the difference there.
Probably Capt. Crunch.
DING!
Even eerier is the fact Rush Limbaugh stated on his evil show that he wanted the tax cuts and spending to equal the breakdown of the Senate!
My hope is if this new non-stimulus bill is passed in the Senate…..that Nancy Pelosi does not accept it as it is and starts over. (She can do that, correct?)
i like this from david sirota: A Team of Zombies
Ian there are somee major issue to discuss.
1. Taking the stimulus away from the state governments will create more job losses. States have cut safety net programs and workers. They are paring jobs from local governments by not sending them their normal share of taxes, Cutting $3.1 billion in spending by CA alone. That will contract the economy. And that is exactly what the fight is about…a way to down size government services and then prtivatize them. To bad we are not seeing this effect.
2.Permanent job creation by growing green energy is an anathema to big carbon who has lobbyied this bill. Getting a jump start to this industry will have pyramid effect tax credits instead of cuts will be more effective on growing the economy.
hugh pointed out on a previous thread, if we were to multiply inflation and the number of people during fdr’s new deal, this bill would have to be somewhere around 5 trillion dollars to match the breadth of that rocovery package, AND most economists thought that package did not go far enough
that COMBINED with the fact that bush’s “recovery package” of tax cuts was 1 1/2 trillion when we were NOT in an economic crisis
WHAT IS WRONG WITH THESE PEOPLE?
Supporters Of $1.3 Trillion Bush Tax Cuts In 2001 Now Call $900 Billion Recovery Plan Billion ‘Too Much’»
Thanks for the detail! *G*
It’s my understanding some have used this to their advantage, and I’m all for the dispossessed.
When you cut taxes you cut revenue.
ian, off topic/on topic, you’ll get some enjoyment from my diary;
the rediculous “global” economy myth
hope you stop by to have a read
good points. i should have, but hadn’t, considered the possibility of big carbon lobbying against the bill.
in addition you cut services that would cost more if not provided by the government
that’s the big killer, your net gain is negative
there are times when “tax cuts” will stimulate the economy, those times are when you have surplus and when there is a particular sector that is struggling or you want it to grow, for instance tax cuts to the alternative energy sector should in the long run be a positive investment
however you don’t make an investment into sectors that are already doing well
OT, but I know there’s been interest & coverage of the MN Senate, um, process, and I thought you guys might want to know about this.
The (St. Paul) Pioneer Press has, in an article about the contest, a poll asking readers who they want to prevail. Right now, Normy’s up over Al 69/22, which is counter to the way comments have been running on this issue on this site.
Thought Firepups might want a chance to express their views here.
Thanks for indulging the interruption, Ian and all. (And to make it less OT, if we could get Senator Franken seated, it might help with this issue!)
Thanks to all for the responses to my housing question. I had to go out and wasn’t able to response right away.
- A Stimulus for the Poor – NYTimes.com
Put the construction industry to work building housing for lower income as the Housing bubble did not serve the population that need affordable…less costly housing.
Putting these people back to work will create a lot of disposable income and they buy trucks…the auto industry consumers.
The people that are crafting the bill are so stupid it realy worries that these are the people making the decisions for us. Put the money where it is needed that will leverage us out of the economic freefall.
Correction re Pioneer Press poll: It asks “Who will ultimately be named Minnesota’s Senator?”
Poll here.
Book Salon upstairs Capital Men
Editorial
Disappearing Jobs
Those are not the only manifestation of deepening job gloom. The underemployment rate, which includes part-time workers who need full-time jobs and jobless workers who have given up looking because their prospects are so dim, plunged deeper into double-digit territory in January, reaching 13.9 percent — or 21.7 million workers — up from 13.5 percent in December. We need a $2 trillion dollar stimulus to get people paychecks they need. No more Raygun economics.
What these morons do not understand is that a job saved is the economic equivalent of a job created.
Because THEY’VE all got jobs?
Yeah, if Franken is seated in the Senate the gang of 4 just might be the gang of 5. Regardless of party they are all plutocrats that suffer from group think. The first rule of plutocrats is never upset the plutocracy.
No doubt Coleman is gaming the system to either be appointed by the courts or to have a special election called. He just might pull it off. Republicans NEVER retreat.
The only criteria for judging the success of this bill is whether or not it protects the interests of the wealthy, and whether or not it allows them to take more money from the public tax rolls and put it in their pockets.
Thanks for the links.
The small business owners need to put pressure on the US Chamber of Commerce.
WOOT WOOT, maybe the Bush Cartel will get a bigger tax cut for this.
My solution as middle ground – boost non-government jobs (non-union jobs) if you really want the Republican turds to vote for it (maybe).
Did they cut food stamps entirely or in part?
I read that the mortgages were moved around so much many of tehm don’t have the paper work. I don’t remember if I read it or saw it on tv but they said “make them show you the paperwork” if they don’t have it they cannot make you move. Wish I remember more, sorry. Ask a lawyer, most give you 1 free consultation.
This is not the article I was talking about, but close.
http://www.boingboing.net/2008…..lgame.html
Update: We ran the numbers last night, based on statements from Senators on the floor. Today’s news has different numbers for how much was cut, and the key difference is that the Gang of Four was using the original Senate bill as the base, not the Senate bill at that moment, with adopted amendments. By then, the Senate totals had grown by nearly $100 billion in tax cuts to fix the AMT, and provide credits and deductions for buying housing and cars. So in getting down to the $780 billion figure they were using last night, the Gang of four spending and tax cut reductions probably don’t equal $140 billion, as we thought last night. Instead, their cuts are likely closer to $105 billion, and that’s still uncertain.
A report on CNN today contained the Democrats’ list of the spending cuts, and they totalled about $88 billion. There are also reductions in tax cuts, but those are still hard to nail down. Reports suggest they pared back the AMT fix, but the status of the house and car tax credits/deductions remains uncertain.
So if I take the same formula used in Ian’s post to compare the Senate bill total before and after the Gang of Four, but using their base, and plug in $88 billion (from CNN) in spending cuts and $20 billion (est) in tax cut reductions, the revised effect on jobs would be: 951,000 fewer jobs.
If your bank doesn’t have your paper work and you paid them, it’s possible some time later some other bank could come to you and say, hey I own the note for this house. You could have paid the wrong bank and lose your money and your home. Best to make sure the people you pay have the note on your home.
When BO talks abt 3.6 mil jobs lost in 14 months he needs to include that effects families and include the numbers of say a family of 4.
3.6 million job loses effect abt 14 million American people.
Now there are 14 million people that need government help.
And this is in a free fall right now and no one knows where the bottom is.
This is simple math any one can understand. Show us the numbers, say it loud and clear and on tv. Bring some of those people with you to a press conference and let Fred the fireman, Nora the nurse, Arty the auto worker, Rita the retail worker, Pat the pizzeria owner tell the American people of their troubles. Shove it in our face, each one from a different state that he needs a Senate vote. Talk to the American people. Everyday.
The philosophy of Keynesian response to a deep recession or Depression is that you spend government money either through job creation spending or temporary targeted job-creating tax cuts (or both) which may place the the country into a deficit. This is acceptable IF it actually does produce employment, since by doing so you increase revenues and/or NET corporate tax revenue to reduce the deficit.
But the trick is spending enough to assure that one creates lots of employment and reduce the need for continued spending on job creation and the temporary social benefits for the unemployed. Otherwise the spending has to continue, the tax cuts become permantized, and the deficits continue to climb.
One needs strong shock treatment. And a little waste and inefficiency might actually create more employment. That’s not bad.
What happens when someone finds the note and he is hundreds of thousands in arrears? I hope he’s putting that money away for when that point arrives.
Help!! My gag reflex is is on overdrive as tsunamis of nausea overwhelm me. I think I blew a circuit watching those human anal fissures Susan Collins and Ben Nelson preen and smirk with self-important sanctimony at their elevation to imperial commanders of the Stimulus negotiations by the mentally retarded, lobotomized media droolers who control our access to information.
Their proposed spending cuts are precisely in the areas that will have the most immediate benefits to the economy: Education(to avoid teacher, staff and supplier layoffs), aid to states (to prevent firemen, cops and all manner of public employees from job cuts), transit (so that if there are still any jobs left the few remaining employed can actually get to work) and energy efficiency (immediate money for insulating and retrofitting public buildings), not to mention programs like Head Start and food stamps (money that will be immediately spent in local stores).
All of their proposed cuts added together aren’t even a third of what we just shoveled into the greedy maw of Bank of America- none of which was returned into the economy through loans or anything else.
Of course, the Defense sector will see a big increase in their proposal, at the expense of those worthless working and poor people.
If this is what we can expect from bipartisanship, then we need to bury that outmoded concept in the same dung heap as corporate welfare, supply side economics and preventive war.
Homeowners can use the absence of original papers to try and block a foreclosure action. Some courts have gone the homeowners’ way in these cases on the basis that only the original note and mortgage are the “best evidence” of the mortgage. The reasoning goes that if the lender can’t produce the best evidence of the mortgage, he has no standing to seek a foreclosure
Even when the lender is willing to modify the loan and forego foreclosure, it is certainly helpful to know whether the bank has original papers because it helps you assess how strong your negotiating position is. The subject has to be handled gingerly though–banks are very touchy negotiators and may walk away from a borrower whom they see as too cute. My advice is not to push the original papers question too much during a negotiation with a willing lender about a loan mod. Your leverage is already significant and you should concentrate on getting the best deal you can.
A couple hundred bucks for a lawyer in your area who knows something about loan modifications would be money well spent.
excellant stuff there
Jane Hamsher:
Remember “Joe Lieberman votes with us on everything but the War”?
Time for Accountability Now to take a serious look at going after Lieberman. He’s killing us.
I agree with your entire post, let me comment on the following;
what will be bad if the initiative is far too small, a very important factor for long term recovery is going to be confidence, if the first recovery plan fails then the next one is going to have a long way to go for the confidence that’s needed in an economy
here’s an important factoid most people do not know;
all money represents, is confidence
that’s all it is
I kind of think if you took all the bills where his one vote would swing the results he has voted against us just about every time
this is known as “wolf in sheeps clothing”
Krugman:
Obama might well say that he won the presidency by making preemptive concessions in his policies, thus giving his GOP opponents a smaller target to shoot at. This might work in elections (might)–but Obama may have made a critical mistake here, as Krugman suggests. If this thing turns out to be as bad as Galbraith and Krugman say it is, then we should look back at this senate performance and take some damn scalps.
Accountability Now has always been aimed/envisioned re: House members, I believe. But Connecticut is a small state, and it is feasible that AN could have a real impact there if it went after a senator.
If this thing tips into a depression, and there are true, reasonable chances that it will–then we should remember what the senate has done here, and hold them accountable.
If this thing tips into a depression, and there are true, reasonable chances that it will–then we should remember what the senate has done here, and hold them accountable.
we’ve been in a depression for at least two years and probably closer to three, we’ve been in recession for five;
real wages have gone down and depressed for at least two years, real investments in this country have gone down and depressed for at least two years, real assets have gone down and depressed for at least two years, real savings have gone down and depressed for at least two years
this has been a depression for at least two years, what people are seeing now is the boil not the desease
by every method of definition this has been a depression for some time, they don’t want to say it because that is what they wrought
I can’t agree with that, perris. Employment has been too high, as well as economic activity, to fit the definition. Regardless–whatever we’re in is getting worse by the month, and I fear we’ll be able to look back and see misteps by both Obama and the Senate, via hindsight.
that’s the first time that happened since the “great” depression
“great”…people misunderstand that depression, that was “the great”, there have been others, when a person mentions “depression” they compare it to “the great” and conclude, ” we are therefore not in a depression”
once I point out “the great” is the extreme and there are levels of depression of course everyone realizes the folly of their reasoning.
now let’s look at this again;
that’s the threshold, we are in the depression from that time forward however we don’t know it, we’re living on borrowed time so to speak
from that time forward jobs will be lost, investments will be reduced, assets will devalue as people sell those assets to pay their bills
when you are borrowing against yourself to keep your job that’s not a job
now let’s look at that statement, “employment has been too high”
employment has been going down obviously, however if you want to look at the number of good jobs that turned into poverty wage jobs I think you’ll see that real employment has been far lower then even the dismal numbers indicate
My business will probably not last through this season, we’ve gone from 5 full time salesmen to one part time salesmen, our staff has gone from 12 crues to 2, we’ve gone from a 3 week wait for installs to doing it the next day
we’ve gone from excellant credit to cod.
now, I have enough saved to invest in a something else however that something else might not pay it’s own bills
I’ll still have a job by labor standars but by reality I do not have a job at all
now if someone else is paying those bills and keeping me working, that’s the same thing only someone besides me is carrying that note
now let’s look at “economic activity”
this is a smoke screen of course, when instruments themselves are inflating their own value and selling to others at that inflated value creating more debt based on nothing, that’s economic activity that is indicative of a depression, it’s not economic activity that argues against the term “depression”
so let’s look at that
from the time economic instruments were re-eavaluating their own value that would probably be the moment we started to regress
obviously that regression would take some time to reach “borrowing more then we make” but from the time we “borrowed more then we make” any kind of activity is a smoke screen