PeakTrader.com

[administrator]

The U.S. lost 8.4 million jobs over the past two years, and 1.8 million jobs are needed each year just to keep up with population growth. Without a sharp increase in job creation this year, federal, state, and local governments will need to raise taxes even more and really cut spending. Chart:

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_pMscxxELHEg/S2wfr6jIdyI/AAAAAAAAHcM/dfZbflHVHYg/s1600-h/PercentJobLossesJan2010.jpg

A gradual recovery isn't good enough at this point:

The U.S. lost 8.4 million jobs over the past two years, and 1.8 million jobs are needed each year just to keep up with population growth.

Discouraged Workers Surge
02-05-2010

"A total of 8.4 million jobs have been lost since the start of the recession in December 2007."

Obama: Economy probably won't produce enough jobs until 2010
September 20, 2009

"I think we'll be adding jobs, but you need 150,000 additional jobs each month just to keep pace with a growing population," the president said."

U.S. unemployment rate falls unexpectedly, but job losses continue
February 5, 2010

"The U.S. unemployment rate unexpectedly dropped to 9.7% in January from 10% in the prior month, but employers eliminated an additional 20,000 net jobs over the month."

My comment:

Basically, the U.S. had a mountain of household debt initially. However, over the past year, a mountain of government debt was added. Who'll be paying-down those two mountains of debt? Households-workers-consumers.

A large tax cut a year ago would've helped households pay-down debt and subsequently strengthened banks. Instead, the government raised and cut taxes, increased spending substantially, and created uncertainty and confusion.

So, the government has made it much more difficult to pay-down debt, rather than easier. With a large tax cut a year ago, households would've paid-down or paid-off the highest interest rate debt first to increase monthly income, while strengthening banks, clear the market of excess assets and goods more quickly, to increase production, the recession would've been less severe, with fewer job losses, and the recovery would've been stronger.