The real issue isn't how well the auction goes, it's how much is the Fed buying. The Cassandras are saying the Fed will continue to add to their balance sheet to keep rates low, and fuel the deficit, and their buying will continue for a lot longer than anyone thinks, and will necessitate printing money. The Fed lost quite a bit last quarter swapping good paper for bad. So far those are only paper losses, but if they are forced to print the money they loaned, there is no easy way to remove that from the money supply.

What is WRONG with these people? Obama says everything is fine. Having a high deficit is no problem and when he raises the taxes on large businesses and wealthy people, why they will just go out and hire a bunch of people to spend the excess money they have that Obama doesn't tax from them.

Right?

No. A large deficit IS a problem. Raising taxes on big business and the wealthy is a way to keep all of that deficit from falling on the middle class. Plowing some of the money back into the system at the low income end increases everybody's earnings because low income people have to spend it. That means the tax base increases. The only disconnect in the system is that entirely too many of the goods that will be purchased by those low income consumers come from outside the US. You can thank those wealthy people and big businesses you care so much about for that.

Thank you for attending economics 101.

"Thank you for attending economics 101."

Ok Bacchus, you in fantasy land again.

You are entitled to your opinions. I enjoy reading them. That said, everything you posted is fundamentally flawed.

In the event you ever take an econ 101 class, i have some advice. If you want to pass, think back to the old Seinfeld episode where George "thinks opposite". This approach lands him the success so lacking in his normal life. If you "think opposite" in your econ 101 class, perhaps you will get an A!

Every time a set of numbers promising "green shoots" hits the news, I say more or less the same thing: Wait for the revision.

(T)oday's report tells us that last week's number has been revised upward, to 6,757,000, which represented a 7000 increase over the week before, and thus the 18th straight week of rising claims.

Hoocoodanode? :)

Looking at the weekly jobless numbers and try to discern the meaning of the weekly trend is like trying to discern what your house will be worth when you pay off the mortgage by looking at what the place next door sold for last month: meaningless, unless you own the place next door.

I understand why pundits do it - because they have to generate something to fill the space, but please, people, let's look at the general trend over, at LEAST a monthly rate. Ideally, a three month period or longer. Historians will not pin-point the figures for a week as the turning point, but will look back and identify a PERIOD that the economy bottomed out.

Because just as corporations and companies shed jobs in a hurry to protect their profits, they also don't rehire people until they are sure they have those margins locked in. A recovey in employment numbers takes MONTHS not weeks.

You should check out this analysis of the May employment report by the BLS:

May Employment Report Not Believable

http://www.chrismartenson.com/blog/may-employment-report-not-believable/20102