The Motley Fool Discussion Boards
Personal Finances / Buying or Selling a Home
|Subject: Re: We have accepted an offer on our home||Date: 7/12/2013 11:20 AM|
|Author: CCinOC||Number: 125754 of 128370|
This is considerably different from my last experience.
One Year Later: Consequences of the Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act of 2010 [a/k/a Dodd-Frank Act]
The Dodd-Frank Act was signed into law by President Obama on July 21, 2010. Dodd-Frank saddles American business with hundreds of new job-crushing regulations. Spencer Bachus & fellow Republicans warned
against the devastating effects of Dodd-Frank. The one-year anniversary of Dodd-Frank’s enactment seems an appropriate occasion for evaluating the competing claims of the law’s proponents and opponents. The economy’s continued sluggishness – characterized by elevated unemployment levels and constrained credit conditions – calls into serious question the claims made by Democrats that Dodd-Frank would increase entrepreneurial activity and investment, trigger robust economic growth, and increase average Americans’ economic security.
Indeed, the opposite appears to be the case. A pervasive climate of uncertainty about government policies is leading to fewer opportunities and less economic security for American families. Faced with a tsunami of new regulatory mandates from Washington, lenders are reluctant to expand their balance sheets and job creators are deferring plans to purchase inventory and add new employees.
In the meantime...
No, last week’s jobs report was not “strong”. It was just another edition of the “born again” jobs scam that has been fueling the illusion of recovery during the entire post-crisis Bernanke Bubble. In fact, 120,000 or 62 percent of the June payroll gain consisted of part-time jobs in restaurants, bars, hotels, retail and temp agencies. The average pay check in this segment amounts to barely $20,000 per year, which is a sub-poverty level income for a family of four, and compares to upwards of $50,000 per year for goods producing jobs in the BLS survey.
Measured on an income equivalent basis, then, a majority of the big rebound in the BLS headline number has consisted of “40 percent jobs”. Granted, these fractional jobs do provide a monthly feed to headline stalking HFT algos and the gist for the moronic jobs number guessing game conducted by unemployable Wall Street executives otherwise known as “street economists”. But not by a long shot do they prove that the Fed’s money printing spree is beginning to bear fruit, as claimed by the cheerleading section of the Wall Street Journal shortly after the BLS release.
Indeed, once upon a time financial journalists actually worked for a living by digging for facts, rather than simply re-posting the spin issued by Washington’s various ministries of truth. In this instance, even a modicum of investigation by the WSJ would have revealed that the 2.8 million part-time jobs “created” since June 2009 reflect the rebirth of the very same 2.8 million jobs that were first generated between 2000 and 2007. That this obvious fact has been completely ignored is not surprising. After all, the reigning doctrine in the Keynesian puzzle palace inhabited by officialdom and financial journalists alike, calls for digging and refilling economic holes as the national policy of first resort.
According to the Wall Street Journal, the Thunderbird School of Management is having to sell itself to a for-profit operator after applications tumbled. The Journal is presenting this as an example of the decline-and-fall of the MBA, but I’m not sure that’s actually what’s happening. The Journal calls Thunderbird a top-ranked program, but my recollection from the MBA application process is that Thunderbird was pretty far down there in the rankings, though they did have an international specialization that was attractive to some students.
Thanks to the Chrissy and Bwaney Show, the U.S. is becoming, relative to other countries, less competitive and more strangled by regulation.
And all vkg wants to do is sell his house.
|Copyright 1996-2016 trademark and the "Fool" logo is a trademark of The Motley Fool, Inc. Contact Us|