Home
Archive
Columnists
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
100 words for 100 days: submit your 100 word essay and get published on AlterNet
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Advertisement
Advertisement

U.S Sees Biggest Unemployment Jump in 22 Years

Posted by Steve Benen, The Carpetbagger Report at 9:56 AM on June 6, 2008.


Unemployment jumped to 5.5 percent in May.
unemployed
unemployed

Share and save this post:
Digg iconDelicious iconReddit iconFark iconYahoo! iconNewsvine! iconFacebook iconNewsTrust icon

Got a tip for a post?:
Email us | Anonymous form

Get PEEK in your
mailbox!

 

On the economic front, the news is “ugly.”

The nation’s unemployment rate jumped to 5.5 percent in May — the biggest monthly rise since 1986 — as nervous employers cut 49,000 jobs.

The latest snapshot of business conditions showed a deeply troubled economy, with dwindling job opportunities in a time of continuing hardship in the housing, credit and financial sectors.

“It was ugly,” said Richard Yamarone, economist at Argus Research.

Of course, given the environment we’re in, economic news has an immediate impact on the political landscape, and the McCain campaign was quick to issue a statement. After noting that the rise in unemployment is a reminder of the “challenges” American families are facing, McCain said:

“…[W]e must act now to support workers, families and employers alike. This means getting our economy back on track by providing immediate tax relief, enacting a HOME plan to help those facing foreclosure, lowering health care costs, investing in innovation, moving toward energy independence and opening foreign markets to our goods. These policies will help small businesses create the jobs that families need today. The American people cannot afford more inaction from Washington.

“The wrong change for our country would be an economic agenda based upon the policies of the past that advocate higher taxes, bigger government, government-run health care and greater isolationism. To help families at this critical time, we cannot afford to go backward as Senator Obama advocates.”

As if we needed another reminder of just how far gone McCain is when it comes to the economy, his campaign offers additional evidence.

So, the economy’s in trouble and unemployment is surging. McCain says we need to cut taxes again (which hasn’t managed to help so far), pass his housing plan (written by a UBS lobbyist and created to help the industry, not families losing their homes), pass his healthcare plan (which leaves millions of Americans with pre-existing conditions behind), invest in “innovation” (though he’s actually opposed to additional spending in the federal budget), promote energy independence (despite his lacking any kind of energy policy), and more trade.

In other words, we need to keep doing exactly what we’ve been doing. More of the same. Stay the course. Stick to the policies that got us into this mess, and wait for them to stop failing. It’s bound to happen eventually.

I was especially amused by McCain’s insistence that it would be “wrong” to pursue the economic policies of the “past.” And when might that be? Does McCain mean the 1990s, when taxes were higher, unemployment was lower, growth was stronger, poverty was lower, and the deficit was non-existent? Is this the “past” McCain is anxious to avoid?

“[W]e cannot afford to go backward as Senator Obama advocates,” McCain insists. But we can afford to stick with trickle-down voodoo economics? Can anyone actually take this nonsense seriously?

For what it’s worth, the Obama campaign issued a statement of its own. It doesn’t respond to the McCain press release, because they were released around the same time:

“Today’s jobs report is deeply troubling. Last month, our economy lost 49,000 jobs and the unemployment rate saw the greatest rise in more than twenty years. This is a reminder that working families continue to bear the brunt of the failed Bush economic policies that John McCain wants to continue for another four years. In the first five months of 2008, our economy has lost 324,000 jobs, and workers’ wages once again failed to keep pace with the skyrocketing cost of health care, and college tuition, and gas. That’s why we can’t afford John McCain’s plan to spend billions of dollars on tax breaks for big corporations and wealthy CEOs, and that’s why I’m offering change that will provide working families with a middle-class tax cut, affordable health care and college, and an energy plan that will create up to five million good-paying jobs that can’t be outsourced. That’s the change the American people are looking for, and that’s how we’ll build an economy of shared prosperity once more.”

AlterNet is a non profit organization and does not make political endorsements. The opinions expressed by our writers are their own.

Digg!

Tagged as: economy, mccain, unemployment


Report: Obama Prepared to Talk to Hamas
Barack Obama is reportedly planning to ditch President Bush's strategy of isolating Hamas, and will instead move to open contacts with the group.
Post by Faiz Shakir. January 8, 2009.
Obama Can Learn from Bush: 'We Tried' Ain't Enough
We will need to remind Obama again and again that for those voters concerned about immigration, 'almost' just ain't gonna cut it come 2012.
Post by Paco Fabian. January 8, 2009.
Rachel Maddow on 'Daily Show': 'Insulted,' 'Embarrassed' By Bush
Jon Stewart and Maddow talk Bush, Obama, Bill Clinton, MSNBC and the Munsters.
Post by Danny Shea. January 8, 2009.
Advertisement
Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
Voodoo of Reaganomics coming home to roast...
Posted by: Ydotheyhateus on Jun 6, 2008 10:21 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
n/t

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The actual unemployment rate is far higher.
Posted by: maxpayne on Jun 6, 2008 10:51 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Don't forget that back in the 1980s followed by the late 1990s, previous administrations had worked with the Labor Dept to fudge the unemployment numbers. Chances are today, the number you'll see is only a fraction of the real percentage of unemployed. Below are some important info sites. While taken back a few years ago, it still holds valid. In fact, the economy has only worsened since then unlike what the corporate media tries to lie to you about:

http://www.moderateindependent.com/v1i16economy.htm

Pulling an ENRON on job figures

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Bush hits another 'trifecta'
Posted by: PakiBoy on Jun 6, 2008 11:13 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Karma is finally catching up with the Amerikkkan Empire:

Oil prices through the roof...wait till winter folks.

Foreclosures through the roof, reminiscent of the Great Depression.

And now the Job loss.

The news keeps getting better.

Of course, Amerikkka still has no remorse for electing war-criminals from JFK down to Bush.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

What do unions have to say about this?
Posted by: non-person on Jun 6, 2008 11:37 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"Gosh, the corporations must be our friends" - SEIU.

Source: New York Times, June 5, 2008 (via http://www.prwatch.org/)

"After waging an aggressive public relations campaign against Wal-Mart for three years, the company’s full-time, union-backed critics, who once vowed never to let up, are putting down their cudgels," writes Michael Barbaro.

The article examines Wal-Mart Watch, sponsored by Andy Stern and his Service Employees International Union, and WakeUpWalmart which is financed by the United Food and Commercial Workers Union.

It notes that the friendlier relationship between the unions and Wal-Mart led to the company disbanding its front group called Working Families for Wal-Mart "Shrill condemnations and embarrassing leaked documents are giving way to acknowledgments of progress — and, in the case of Wal-Mart Watch, free advice."

Through targeted (but inadequate) labor and environmental initiatives, the company has left its critics "navigating a complex situation in which they have to decide, issue by issue, whether to shake hands with the company or to slap it."

SEIU - another false front for corporate interests - the most common theme in America today, all organized by "non-profit foundations" who keep their donor lists secret. That's who backs all of the left-wing and right-wing press in the United States - corporate America and Wall Street. Without their cash flows, much of the left-wing and right-wing press would vanish into obscurity. Yes, I said it - SEIU is a union-busting front for corporate America (see their advert to the right?).

There is a good argument for reclassifying many of these 501 non-profit groups as 527 groups, actually:

A 527 group is a type of American tax-exempt organization named after a section of the United States tax code, 26 U.S.C. § 527. A 527 group is created primarily to influence the nomination, election, appointment or defeat of candidates for public office. Although candidate committees and political action committees are also created under Section 527, the term is generally used to refer to political organizations that are not regulated by the Federal Election Commission or by a state elections commission, and are not subject to the same contribution limits as PACs.

Alternet and the Independent Media Institute should be reclassified as a 527 partisan political group, along with a whole host of others. They certainly aren't "independet media".

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

selling the tax cuts
Posted by: zooeyhall on Jun 6, 2008 12:19 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Hey...wasn't having all those tax cuts supposed to keep this sort of thing from happening?!?!

And while 5.5% is not good...I remember back in '80-'82 unemployment reached 10.5%. And it was all sold by the media as "necessary" and needed "to wring inflation out of the economy".

So, people, it can get lots worse. And I'm sure the media will put a spin on it.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: selling the tax cuts Posted by: VZEQICVA
» RE: selling the tax cuts Posted by: Ayla87
» RE: selling the tax cuts Posted by: Turiye
» RE: selling the tax cuts Posted by: Ayla87
» RE: selling the tax cuts Posted by: maxpayne
» Try again Posted by: Ayla87
» RE: selling the tax cuts Posted by: desidid
Energy Independence
Posted by: acollins on Jun 6, 2008 4:52 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The DOW tanking and oil skyrocketing are 'symptoms' of a failed energy policy, at every level of government. We need to:

a) Build PHEVs (plug-in hybrid electric vehicles) to revitalize Detroit's obsolete car technology.

b) Build advanced technology nuclear power plants to power (a) and the economy, and to eliminate oil imports.

c) To satisfy the environmentalists, and solve climate change if it needs 'solving', plant solar planters and wind farms around the 'nukes'.

d) After doing the above, we go fishing.

Regards, Art Collins, Retired Aerospace & 'Nuke' Engineer

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: nergy Independence Posted by: desidid
Nice Job
Posted by: RedFoxOne on Jun 6, 2008 8:38 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Thank you Dictator Bush, isnt it now time to feed the American Sheeple a bunch of outright lies and tell us everything is just hunky dory?

JT
http://www.Ultimate-Anonymity.com

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Bad News for America, Good News For Democrats
Posted by: JibreelRiley on Jun 6, 2008 10:23 PM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This is only a cycle however it happens to be an Election Year so lets start the Great Depression Spin, Yay. You can thank Iran vs Israel for the spike in gas prices... wait the media forgot to mention that however Israel dose have the right to defend itself even if America (Congress) wants to sit on there hands.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

22 Years?
Posted by: robbie.seal on Jun 9, 2008 10:54 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
What was the rate under Clinton? If I remember right, he got it down to 6.5% and he was hailed as Christ's second cumming...

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

This is the time to reduce the work week
Posted by: Charley2u on Jun 10, 2008 7:19 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Now that we are entering a cycle of low growth and rising inflation it has to be clear Washington solution has failed.

Cutting the work week now to 32 hours, or even 24, is called for. Why the unions and progressive haven't organized to do this is beyond me.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Shorten the work week? Posted by: robbie.seal
Solution
Posted by: Dianka on Jun 25, 2008 8:03 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Why are people so worried? We already have the solution, which we shared in abundance with former welfare recipients: Just work hard and play by all the rules. Pull yourselves up by the bootstraps. Seek a hand-up, not a hand-out. There is NO excuse for not working. If you can't afford it, don't buy it. The want ads are full of job listings, any job is a good job, so quit whining. If one job doesn't cover the bills, get two jobs.

This formula ended poverty in the US; we know this by the fact that the media never mentions poor people in the US.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]