http://www.theneitherworld.com/us/castleforrester/mst3k/ptqe.jpg
― Ned Raggett, Friday, 21 November 2008 18:33 (fifteen years ago) link
front cover of my paper today:
R.I. unemployment rate climbs to 9.3%By Lynn Arditi
Rhode Island’s unemployment rate last month climbed to 9.3 percent, the highest since 1983, as job cuts in the private and public sectors coursed through nearly every part of the economy, a government report released today shows.
Factories, offices and retail stores, among others, slashed payrolls in October, eliminating 2,400 jobs, according to the Rhode Island Department of Labor and Training. The ranks of the unemployed last month swelled to nearly 53,000, the highest on record.
Rhode Island’s October unemployment rate is identical to that of Michigan, where Detroit’s Big Three automakers this week pleaded for American taxpayers to help their industry as prospects of receiving federal rescue aid dimmed.
― Edward III, Friday, 21 November 2008 19:01 (fifteen years ago) link
what are the odds of the Mets changing the name of their new ballpark before April now?
http://mlb.mlb.com/images/2008/02/25/Cjkg94Q8.jpg
― Dr Morbius, Friday, 21 November 2008 19:04 (fifteen years ago) link
California right on up there with ya, Ed:
Reporting from Los Angeles and Sacramento -- California's unemployment rate rose dramatically in October to 8.2%, its highest level in 14 years, the state Employment Development Department reported today.The figures were released at the same time that President George W. Bush signed into law a $6-billion extension of unemployment benefits that provides as many as 33 weeks of additional assistance for Californians, whose benefits would have run out.California's increase from 7.7% in September was larger than the national increase in joblessness; the U.S. unemployment rate jumped four-tenths of a point, to 6.5%, in a tally reported earlier this month. California's unemployment is the third-highest in the United States, exceeded only by Michigan and Rhode Island at 9.3% each.The state's economic picture "continues to be difficult," acknowledged Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger in a statement. "As our state unemployment rate rises, my administration continues to work hard to generate jobs and help re-train people who have lost jobs in our hard-hit industries."The slowdown in the state's economy worsened in October as job losses spread from the hard-hit construction, real estate and financial services areas to retail sales, said Howard Roth, chief economist for the California Department of Finance. The monthly drop in payroll employment by 26,400 jobs was the worst since January.
The figures were released at the same time that President George W. Bush signed into law a $6-billion extension of unemployment benefits that provides as many as 33 weeks of additional assistance for Californians, whose benefits would have run out.
California's increase from 7.7% in September was larger than the national increase in joblessness; the U.S. unemployment rate jumped four-tenths of a point, to 6.5%, in a tally reported earlier this month. California's unemployment is the third-highest in the United States, exceeded only by Michigan and Rhode Island at 9.3% each.
The state's economic picture "continues to be difficult," acknowledged Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger in a statement. "As our state unemployment rate rises, my administration continues to work hard to generate jobs and help re-train people who have lost jobs in our hard-hit industries."
The slowdown in the state's economy worsened in October as job losses spread from the hard-hit construction, real estate and financial services areas to retail sales, said Howard Roth, chief economist for the California Department of Finance. The monthly drop in payroll employment by 26,400 jobs was the worst since January.
― Ned Raggett, Friday, 21 November 2008 19:04 (fifteen years ago) link
yeah but RI must enjoy this brief moment when they are #1 in something
― Edward III, Friday, 21 November 2008 19:05 (fifteen years ago) link
You guys ever seen a sinkhole forming? Or a river bank caving away during a flood? That's what's been happening to the job market for the past few months.
― Aimless, Friday, 21 November 2008 19:19 (fifteen years ago) link
I am weary of punishing the market at the pump in order to fix this.
I'm not sure what you mean by "punishing the market", but if you mean "punishing consumers", then I agree. I don't think consumers should be punished. That's why I'm saying return the revenue in the form of a tax credit. I also don't think the industry needs to be punished. The industry did what it needed to do in order to survive in the market that government created by guaranteeing low gas prices for the past couple of decades. The industry gave consumers what they wanted to buy. I don't think it needs to be punished. We need to realize that we have allowed the industry and a national infrastructure to grow up around the assumption of cheap gas prices, which may have not been the smartest thing to do.
― o. nate, Friday, 21 November 2008 19:56 (fifteen years ago) link
Frankly I don't think the public is in a poor position to act rationally when making consumer choices.
arent you the dude that cant keep track of the balance in his own bank account?
― Lamp, Friday, 21 November 2008 19:59 (fifteen years ago) link
let's have a floor on gas prices. And a ceiling on income. And a calorie restriction on pizza. And a ceiling on the hourly rate for lawyers, while we're at it.
How about a moratorium on market fundamentalism?
― o. nate, Friday, 21 November 2008 20:03 (fifteen years ago) link
a floor on gas prices is a retarded idea tho
― Lamp, Friday, 21 November 2008 20:06 (fifteen years ago) link
I can sense the intelligence level of this conversation rising already.
― o. nate, Friday, 21 November 2008 20:07 (fifteen years ago) link
better the government push alternative energy development and fuel efficiency through investment and legislation than taxes which seem unnecessarily circuitous and punitive
― :) wealth destruction! (ice cr?m), Friday, 21 November 2008 20:12 (fifteen years ago) link
not to mention politically perilous
― :) wealth destruction! (ice cr?m), Friday, 21 November 2008 20:13 (fifteen years ago) link
OK, that's a reasonable argument. But to me, it seems that in the current environment, government spending more on alternative energy is trying to push the stone of Sisyphus up a hill - whereas raising gas taxes is bulldozing the hill. If the cost of conventional energy sources (ie. carbon energy) is raised over a certain threshold, then the economics of alternative energy suddenly becomes compelling. Until that threshold is reached, alternative energy, barring some miraculous breakthrough, is going to remain a tiny niche, no matter how much money government pours into it.
― o. nate, Friday, 21 November 2008 20:19 (fifteen years ago) link
― Lamp, Friday, November 21, 2008 2:59 PM (17 minutes ago) Bookmark Suggest
And I am a college graduate. Just call me exhibit A.
― Adam Bruneau, Friday, 21 November 2008 20:22 (fifteen years ago) link
you may be right it just seems so silly on the face of it to me
hay guys gas is wicked expensive huh better get crackin developing some alternatives no - but you made it cost so much - huh what no ridiculous get back to work
besides at this point there seems to be widespread recognition that oils cheapness is completely unreliable an unsustainable
xp
― :) wealth destruction! (ice cr?m), Friday, 21 November 2008 20:26 (fifteen years ago) link
If the cost of conventional energy sources (ie. carbon energy) is raised over a certain threshold, then the economics of alternative energy suddenly becomes compelling.
how does a floor on gas prices achieve this?
― Lamp, Friday, 21 November 2008 20:26 (fifteen years ago) link
i am v. v. much in agreement with you that we've "allowed the industry and a national infrastructure to grow up around the assumption of cheap gas prices" but a price floor seems like a political and administrative nightmare to implement. easier to at the very least scrap existing subsidies in place for coal, oil and natural gas suppliers.
― Lamp, Friday, 21 November 2008 20:32 (fifteen years ago) link
Seems self-evident to me, though perhaps I'm misunderstanding your question.
I hope this is true. But I don't think this undermines the case for a price floor or higher gas taxes. If anything, if a political consensus can be achieved for higher gas taxes, that is going to accelerate the transition away from carbon fuels, which would be a good thing. There are lots of reasons to not want our economy to be dependent on carbon fuels besides the idea that they are going to get more expensive anyway. For instance, the environmental costs, or the national security risks of being dependent on energy from politically unstable regions.
― o. nate, Friday, 21 November 2008 20:35 (fifteen years ago) link
a price floor seems like a political and administrative nightmare to implement. easier to at the very least scrap existing subsidies in place for coal, oil and natural gas suppliers
I haven't thought about the logistics, but it seems like the gasoline tax that we currently have is collected without too much of a bureaucratic nightmare. I agree totally about scrapping the subsidies.
― o. nate, Friday, 21 November 2008 20:38 (fifteen years ago) link
i dont think a floor on gas prices addresses the larger point you were making about the economics of alternative enrgy i.e. gas prices are only a portion of what makes things like wind or solar power or hybrid cars or w/e nonviable currently.
and lol market fundamentalism but i'd rather see increased fuel tax than a price floor
― Lamp, Friday, 21 November 2008 20:41 (fifteen years ago) link
I haven't thought about the logistics
we have a winner.
― Dandy Don Weiner, Friday, 21 November 2008 20:44 (fifteen years ago) link
It's true gasoline is only part of the picture. In terms of foreign imports, I think it's probably the biggest part of the picture though - since we have large domestic supplies of natural gas and coal. So the issue is a bit different there. But I would not necessarily be against similar taxes on other carbon fuels as well.
Perhaps a simple tax would be easier to implement than a floor. Though I don't think the floor would be literally a floor on the price charged at the retail level - instead I would imagine that the tax level would be set quarterly or monthly based on projected retail prices over the following period in order to maintain the floor approximately.
― o. nate, Friday, 21 November 2008 20:45 (fifteen years ago) link
So there would be one nationwide gas tax per gallon changed quarterly, so naturally the "floor" would fluctuate from day to day and state to state depending on local market conditions.
― o. nate, Friday, 21 November 2008 20:50 (fifteen years ago) link
I really don't know how you could legislatively implement a floor and have it get through the courts. Which was the point of my sarcasm upthread O. Nate.
Taxes are way easier to implement. And easier to raise, I presume.
― Dandy Don Weiner, Friday, 21 November 2008 20:54 (fifteen years ago) link
Can you even have a floor (or ceiling) in muni utilities?
― Dandy Don Weiner, Friday, 21 November 2008 20:55 (fifteen years ago) link
lol PG&E
― Lamp, Friday, 21 November 2008 20:56 (fifteen years ago) link
I don't think the implementation I sketched out would be too complicated to get passed. It seems workable to me. What's the weak link?
Not sure about utilities - though that's a different can of worms.
― o. nate, Friday, 21 November 2008 20:56 (fifteen years ago) link
Meanwhile, in other news, the stock market likes Geithner:
http://biz.yahoo.com/rb/081121/business_us_markets_stocks.html
― o. nate, Friday, 21 November 2008 21:03 (fifteen years ago) link
either that or the volatility is related to the day traders bingeing into the weekend
― Dandy Don Weiner, Friday, 21 November 2008 21:04 (fifteen years ago) link
Yeah, that's true - a 6% up or down move on a given day is kind of just noise in this market.
― o. nate, Friday, 21 November 2008 21:06 (fifteen years ago) link
given that hedge funds are not even 50% unwound yet, there's gonna be market volativity for awhile.
And I'd guess this rally is based on hope (i.e. new kid on block) given the horrible fundamentals and lagging indicators that we've been seeing.
― Dandy Don Weiner, Friday, 21 November 2008 21:08 (fifteen years ago) link
i bought more berkshire
― bnw, Thursday, November 20, 2008 2:59 PM (Yesterday) Bookmark
i win!
― bnw, Friday, 21 November 2008 21:09 (fifteen years ago) link
Actually the single Hummer driver would suffer less because his vehicle would only be used to visit strip clubs and football games.
― Tracer Hand, Friday, November 21, 2008 11:02 AM (4 hours ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink
this dude seems like a bro we should invite him to 77
― is that my man hannity?? (deej), Friday, 21 November 2008 21:39 (fifteen years ago) link
― Dandy Don Weiner, Friday, November 21, 2008 2:44 PM (54 minutes ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink
we have a weiner
― o. nate, Friday, November 21, 2008 3:56 PM (1 hour ago) Bookmark
That we've already had (historically/record-) high gas prices this year?
― Adam Bruneau, Friday, 21 November 2008 22:38 (fifteen years ago) link
And I guess you're kind of fucked if gas goes up and doesn't even ever go down to $2.25 or whatever a gallon again
― Tracer Hand, Saturday, 22 November 2008 00:14 (fifteen years ago) link
drudge headline by icanhascheezburger.com
http://i36.tinypic.com/1zqbl3c.jpg
― :) wealth destruction! (ice cr?m), Saturday, 22 November 2008 00:58 (fifteen years ago) link
the main reason I think an enforced floor for gas prices would be a failure is because any govt intervention regarding fuel prices is going to wind up having an exception for diesel. If the intention is to actually reduce per capita carbon footprint in the most effective way possible without trying to fuck with the price of milk and eggs, then any legislation should stick to emissions standards for passenger (commuter) automotives and a progressive tax on the fuels used by same. White collar internet fags should be reminded that some motor vehicles are actually part of the industrial base.
― TOMBOT, Saturday, 22 November 2008 05:56 (fifteen years ago) link
http://www.treehugger.com/2008-01-23_093749-TreeHugger-glass-house.jpg
white collar internet fags at home
― Lamp, Saturday, 22 November 2008 06:22 (fifteen years ago) link
Dimitri Martin: "There is an old saying, 'people in glass houses shouldn’t throw stones.' Throwing stones is just bad behavior. It should be, 'no stone throwing regardless of housing situation.' Unless you were trapped in a glass house, then by all means, if you have a stone, use it. So really its, 'only people in glass houses should throw stones. If they are trapped inside.'"
― fiscal liberal (kenan), Saturday, 22 November 2008 06:28 (fifteen years ago) link
yeah don't mess with diesel pls it's still more expensive tho if you do i'll just put wesson or kerosene or fuel oil or whatever in mine. kthx.
― Kerm, Saturday, 22 November 2008 06:50 (fifteen years ago) link
I am definitely trapped inside a glass house thanks to my not owning a car and having a govt contractor job that requires me to be in an office on the internet
― TOMBOT, Saturday, 22 November 2008 06:56 (fifteen years ago) link
but thanks for clearing that up irony pedant squad
the house IS carbon neutral. i read that as a shot at me tbh
― Lamp, Saturday, 22 November 2008 06:59 (fifteen years ago) link
I don't know if you're kidding or what.
― fiscal liberal (kenan), Saturday, 22 November 2008 11:37 (fifteen years ago) link
No you don't.
― TOMBOT, Saturday, 22 November 2008 16:01 (fifteen years ago) link
http://media.economist.com/images/20081122/CUS484.gif
― caek, Saturday, 22 November 2008 16:41 (fifteen years ago) link
no Demetri Martin quoting til we hit bottom
― Dr Morbius, Saturday, 22 November 2008 16:44 (fifteen years ago) link
ha yes ty morbs
― :) wealth destruction! (ice cr?m), Saturday, 22 November 2008 17:01 (fifteen years ago) link