I don't trust any economic data coming from anyone who's job depends on the support of the Bush Administration. It's all politics with them... no substance. Playing fast and loose with the facts is pretty much the established modus operandi of these guys. Political expediency has trumped actual governance every time.

Was it last fall when they released the data showing the economy lost 80K jobs, when other private researchers said ther real number was closer to 400K?

The house of cards is getting unbelievably high, and the current admininstration has no problem adding to it. We're going to see some serious belt-tightening in '09, just like we had in '92.

Re: "Someone remind me of when "the leisure society" is supposed to kick in, again? "

It already has, if you're the CEO who tanked Bear Sterns.

Or wee you talking about the rest of us?

If John McCain picks Mitt "I will flip flop on ANY issue" Romney, I'll not only vote against the ticket, but I'll work feverishly against it!

John McCain does NOT need to wear that "Mitt"!!

http://OsiSpeaks.com

Two days ago this last Wednesday, I decided to go to my local Kroger to pick up a few groceries and buy gas (at $3.19 per gallon!). I noticed that the store was unusually heavily trafficked. So while browsing the aisles and waiting to check out, I decided to do my unscientific study. I checked to see if there had been a change in how people shopped, and ALAS, there had been.

People NOW took their times checking for bargains, and used stacks of coupons. I had never seen that before. If that doesn't give you a good picture of what the economy is doing to folks, nothing else will!

http://OsiSpeaks.com

With the economy tanking, why then is NPR reporting that Iraq is the number one talking point about the primary in Pennsylvania? Do residents there live in a United States where housing prices have not changed, and unemployment is still low and gas is under $3.00 per gallon? My last three trips to fill up were all over $3.50/gallon. It frustrating.

As a lifetime resident of PA, I can tell you that the housing BOOM never touched here and unemployment has always been high compared to the rest of the country, as has gas. So when the country experiences a sharp downturn - while it still affects us - it isn't as pronounced or as crippling as it must be in areas like Las Vegas or Miami or Phoenix where growth has been so spectacular. We've been losing jobs and residents for decades now, so it just feels like more of the same.

Couple this with the fact that - according to several reports I've seen - PA has close to, if not THE, highest casualty rates in the current war (especially here in the greater-Pittsburgh area, where I live), and it's not hard to see why it's issue #1 on the campaign trail.

... that people who are unemployed are likely to have both the time and the inclination to vote in the next election, and a bad attitude about current government policies.

I should also add, though, that most people here also understand the potential for the current crisis to cripple our nation beyond recovery, and I do wish we'd get a little more in the way of concrete actions the candidates plan to take to combat this if they're elected. So far all I hear are vague pronouncements ("I've got a three-part plan to turn our economy around..." etc.) that do little but fill me with cynicism for the whole electoral process. As if I didn't have enough to begin with.

Hmm funny - I thought NPR had devolved into an endless series of reports on misfortunate yet heroic brown people from far away lands.

Just goes to show, you can't believe everything Rush tells you.

Now while you go either cry a river or cream your head off defending your god, I'll go have lunch.

Human beings have unlimited desires. Think about it: we have ten times the material wealth that our great grandparents had.

Do any of us say, "Gee, I think I'll live the same lifestyle as people in 1890 (i.e., no electricity, no cars, telephones, cable, cruises to mexico, guinness beer, dinner at olive garden on staruday, starbucks frappuccinos, etc.) and therefore won't work as hard?

No, we can never get enough. If I doubled your hourly wage, would you work half as many hours per day? Some would, the rest would eagerly increase their consumption. The leisure society is a fantasy.

Are you sure you get to eat today? I mean there are Honduran loom workers going without today. You should donate your fat Bwana colonialist share.

BTW, I am not a Republican and I don't listen to hate radio. A few days ago someone put up the URL for a "political compass" and it rapidly became a Salon free for all for who could claim the furthest leftist belief system. At some point you have to laugh at people who claim that Emma Goldman was too reactionary for them. So if being to the wright Mao Tse Tung brands me a right wing fascist, I think that says a lot more about your stupidity and delusions than anything else.

Now, have a nice lunch, thinking of poor children in Africa.

Do any of us say, "Gee, I think I'll live the same lifestyle as people in 1890 (i.e., no electricity, no cars, telephones, cable, cruises to mexico, guinness beer, dinner at olive garden on staruday, starbucks frappuccinos, etc.) and therefore won't work as hard?

Electricity - Direct Current (patent: 1880, start of distribution: 1882), Alternating Current (patent: 1888; start of distribution: 1893 (point conceded on AC distribution))

Cars (assuming you mean self-propelled vehicles with gasoline powered internal combustion engines) - Karl Benz (patent: 1886, production: 1888), Gottlieb Daimler & Wilhelm Maybach (car from scratch 1889; also invented motor bike in 1886)

Telephone: 1876

Guinness Beer: 1759 (in Ireland)

Now, if you meant the ease of acquiring said things in 1890 at a reasonable price, then you would be right. However, that is not what you said.