On 12/17/2015 9:04 AM, xxxxxx@shadowgard.com wrote:
On 16 Dec 2015 at 18:03, Kurt Feltenberger wrote:

> On 12/15/2015 11:21 PM, Richard Aiken wrote:
> > And they say the economy is recovering . . . yeah, right.
> >
> 
> Only in politicians and economists minds.  I worked, past tense, for a 
> third party logistics company that warehoused finished products for the 
> largest cookie/biscuit bakery in the area among several other large 
> local companies and from Jan 2013 to Jan 2014 our monthly billable 
> receipts declined almost 30%.
> 
> If there's a boom, it's not in this area.
There's a *huge* difference between "recovery" and "boom". 

And frankly. you don't *want* a boom. That's when the economy is 
expanding very fast. Booms are almost always followed by "busts" 
because the growth wasn't sustainable (or, all too often, it was 
effectively a ppyramid scheeme where early adopters made money but 
later adopters lost big).

You want *steady* growth of the economy. Not rapid growth. at least 
not overly rapid.

Slow day, Leonard?  ;-)  I'm well aware of the difference and really didn't need a lecture on the word I used while hastily pecking out a reply.

Boom or recovery, it isn't happening here.  The job and unemployment numbers are all smoke and mirrors; how can you have a recovery, or even a boom, when almost a third of the overall population is either unemployed (and many are no longer receiving benefits), under employed, or have wrangled their way onto disability to keep their head above water without cooking the books and cherry picking the numbers.

--
Kurt Feltenberger
xxxxxx@thepaw.org/xxxxxx@yahoo.com
“Before today, I was scared to live, after today, I'm scared I'm not living enough." - Me