http://finance.yahoo.com/news/Fears-grow-a...637055.html?x=0

makes u wonder if they had used that "stimulus" money for us, the people, instead of banks, car companies etc. where we could be now?

The truth is that many of the jobs lost will never come back. Part of it is economic business necessity and part of it is the new world order of things and globalization. There lies the fundamental problem with any real and sustained economic recovery. If jobs don't return, neither will the economy in any significant way. It was a consumer diven economy that fueled the recent boom years. Consumerism will not bail out the economy this time around with fewer employed, wage compression, maxed-out debt, and no home equity to tap into. The economy may lumber back slowly, but many people are permanently fated to a lower lifestyle than they previously experienced.

Many people...myself included...were living in a higher lifestyle than they needed to be. Yes, its nice to have and buy things but sometimes its good to step back and evaluate what we want and what we need. Now I am not talking about people who lost jobs who are having problems putting three good meals on the table and keeping a roof over their head. I'm talking about people making $40,000 who have to buy Rembrandt toothpaste because Pepsodent is beneath them. Or who make 40K and spend 45K on fancy dinners and weekly trips to the golf course. Maybe now they have to be cooking at home and going once every other week to play golf. In those cases, its not a lower lifestyle. Its the proper lifestyle.

Nailed it. The overall problem is everyone wants to pretend their rich when they're not or buying stuff when they know they wouldn't be able to afford it. There is too much greed (and it works both ways). People need to step back and realize life is not about iPhones, laptops, huge tv etc.

There is nothing wrong say using a windows laptop over an apple one. For the younger generation is all about looking cool and showing off and trying to get your parents to buy that apple one. When the MTA wanted to get rid of student metrocards look at all the outcry. Now I wonder how many of those parents are paying $99 a per for their iPhone, blackberry or who know want else. I have the money to buy that huge TV, but I don't have the money to put on the AC.

This post and Jimrin's earlier post is exactly what's needed, but it's also why the economy will not roar back. Lack of spending, whether by choice, fiscal responsibility, or necessity, will slow growth. It's the dichotomy of being lectured to save, but save too much at the expense of spending and the economy suffers. The stimulus checks did little to kick start the economy as hoped, because most people chose to pay down credit and debt, as opposed to spending. This economy is not an easy fix. Perhaps limping back to health as opposed to roaring back is a better long term solution. But that will come with pain and major lifestyle adjustments for many.

we can not afford to pay for those that shouldn't be here in the first place as well. when/if the politicians realize this, perhapse our taxes can decrease.

If you're referring to illegal immigrants, agree 100% and it's amazing how most politiicans refuse to tackle this, probably from fear of minority fall-out and loss of votes. Nothing seems to happen on the subject, other than to keep things as they are, or make things even worse. Despite the major media uproar over Arizona's recently instituted illegal immigrant policies, the overwhelming majority of Amercians favor it, myself included -- and my usual politics are left of center.

The problem also is everything is going sky high yet paychecks seem to hold steady. The burden on the economy is holding too much on the working middle class. Call me cynical but I don't see a good future ahead for the USA. The richer just keep getting richer and run the show without any care in the world or responsibility for bad behavior and the poorer just get poorer.

Just maybe one day people will start to open their eyes and start taking back our country from the government and the rich.

Well said Jimrin1967. Those last two sentences say it all.

I've got no problem helping people who have lost jobs through no fault of their own (say what you want about personal responsibility, but one person on his/her own cannot control the economy at large) but I wish the government would do more to promote long-term job growth, because that's the only thing that will ease this crisis. People need to remember that businesses don't hire because they want a tax break; they hire because they have work that needs to be done. I don't know if Obama has great economic advisors. You've got to wonder how things are going to look when all of the government stimulus wears off. Was it like putting a band-aid on a gunshot wound or will it lead to organic growth in the economy?

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/Second-Reces...sset=&ccode

when did the first one end??????????????

That's right. Lol. However, history is a good barometer. After the market crash in '29, there were many brief rallies. Only with hindsight and the benefit of history did one realize that the stock markets continued to decline for over a decade and, adjusted for inflation, didn't fully recover for 30 years. It also took a world war and the US' position after the war as the world's primary producer and provider for us to recover. These are very perilous times.

Weren't we starting to pull out of the Depression in '36 or '37 before the government took its foot off the pedal and stopped spending in an attempt to stimulate growth? Then everything collapsed again.

I think that's true to a point. I also think there was so much regulation that it weighed the ecomony down. WWII is what really put an end to high unemployment.

So...should we declare war against China?

It's pretty much universally accepted that government spending is a must to get out of an economic depression. Government is the spender of last resort when no other sector spends.

And there's no way in hell that we'll see another stimulus package before the 2012 elections. The Republicans in the House would never vote for it. The Fed just said that we're probably in for another 2-3 years of anemic growth, at best.

The political part of our economic problems is that, given the devisiveness of the parties, it will be near impossible to get buy-in and agreement by both sides on any major initiatives.

It's called the Recession of 1937 and it was a recession inside of the Great Depression. Three years of economic gains were lost.

They had raised taxes and cut spending.

Fed says they will keep interest rates near where they are for the next few years. It sounds like another way of saying the economy will be sluggish at best for the next few years. Lets hope it's not worse than "just sluggish."

Suze Orman probably had it right all along...she said we wouldn't get out of this until 2014 or 2015.

One thing Suze Orman and many others also said was get out of bonds, interest rates are going up. That was a mistake.

Fair point. Can't bat a thousand, I guess. But people were too quick to say that things were picking up again. Biden and his "recovery summer" tour from last year is a good example. We didn't get into this mess overnight; why would things dramatically improve? A lot of excess needed to get wiped out of the system.