New Jobless Claims 428K

CNN Money :

The number of Americans filing for first-time unemployment benefits slipped only slightly last week, falling short of economists' expectations for a bigger drop. There were 428,000 initial jobless claims filed in the week ended June 25 -- 1,000 fewer than the week before, the Labor Department said. It marked the 12th straight week initial claims have stayed above the 400,000 mark -- and was worse than the 420,000 claims economists surveyed by Briefing.com had expected.

< Javier Colon Wins the Voice | Winning! >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

  • Display: Sort:
    Never fear (5.00 / 2) (#1)
    by MO Blue on Thu Jun 30, 2011 at 07:46:49 AM EST
    The economy is doing just fine and dandy for Obama's donor base.  

       Pay Tally Up 19% for Finance Chiefs

    Median pay for chief financial officers of S&P 500 companies surged 19% to $2.9 million last year, as profits and stock valuations rebounded and some finance chiefs assumed broader responsibilities, according to a Wall Street Journal survey.

    CFO pay varied widely, from less than $600,000 to more than $60 million. Five CFOs received more than $20 million in compensation. Growth in pay partly reflected the growing clout and multiple responsibilities of some finance chiefs, and moves by some companies to combine the function with others.

    "...assumed broader responsibilities..." (5.00 / 1) (#3)
    by kdog on Thu Jun 30, 2011 at 08:02:23 AM EST
    Broader responsibilities?  Haven't they been responsible for enough economic terrorism?

    At least Obama and the GOP unmerry band of thieves will have no problems raising cash.  Joe and Jane Blow raising cash for the rent could be in for a hard time, worker's slice of the pie keeps getting smaller and smaller.


    Worker's slice of the pie (5.00 / 1) (#4)
    by MO Blue on Thu Jun 30, 2011 at 08:08:04 AM EST
    getting smaller and smaller = more corporate profits = multi-million dollar salaries and bonus for savvy businessmen = campaign contributions for politicians who structure the legislation to benefit big donors.  

    Like I always say... (none / 0) (#5)
    by kdog on Thu Jun 30, 2011 at 08:34:37 AM EST
    government is little more than a protection racket for the uber-wealthy.

    The only way I can think of to break that chain that doesn't involve getting locked up is electing a name without a D or R after it.  But everybody has bought the two-party framing of our democracy hook, line, and sinker.


    Geithner Announcement (5.00 / 2) (#7)
    by ScottW714 on Thu Jun 30, 2011 at 09:47:51 AM EST
    "...moves by some companies to combine the function with others"

    Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner has announced a move meant to unburden bankers from undue stress.  The plan will merge Wall Street with Treasury Department after reviewing fifteen complaints that moving all the wheel barrows of cash was causing calloused hands and perspiration to appear on Bankers brows.

    Once the merger is complete, Wall Street can streamline the cash printing business by actually printing cash.  When asked to comment, Geithner said, "It just makes sense."  All parties were looking forward to the new venture.

    An unnamed source close to the cash has said the unemployement rate is so low, that some bankers were being forced to collect two paychecks.  Upon news of the -3% Wall Street unemployement rumors, Chinese stocks soared as Financial sector stocks plummet as bankers watched from their towers so giddy with joy their laughter could be from the space station.

    In anticipation of retirement accounts vanishing, Wall Street was expecting a much larger and older labor force to wipe the A's, form human chains to transport the fat-cats about town, and to endlessly groveling at their feet for table scraps to feed their starving children.  

    One banker was  quoted as saying, "We are turning a corner, our business model has been completely overhauled to reflect the management style Obama has ushered in".


    Well penned sir... (5.00 / 1) (#9)
    by kdog on Thu Jun 30, 2011 at 11:17:22 AM EST
    You should write a mockumentary, before it's an actual documentary.

    We'd (none / 0) (#2)
    by Ga6thDem on Thu Jun 30, 2011 at 07:49:38 AM EST
    better all plan to start voting in the GOP primaries with these numbers.

    I wish (none / 0) (#6)
    by CST on Thu Jun 30, 2011 at 09:36:06 AM EST
    I could vote in both primaries.

    Here you have to be a registered party member to vote in any primary.  I will be focusing on the senate seat, since it's one of the few we may take back.

    I feel like no one has been talking about the other races which will be hugely important, no matter who wins the presidency.  I really hope we can take back the house, which seems possible - especially as we may end up losing the senate.

    It would be catastrophic if we lose the senate and the pres, and don't take back the house.


    Yes, (5.00 / 1) (#8)
    by Ga6thDem on Thu Jun 30, 2011 at 10:01:23 AM EST
    I think the house is where the hope lays.

    Anyway, being able to vote in the GOP primary is no great shakes. It's not like I really care about any of them nor do any of them excite me in the least. And then you get to the issue of who to vote for? Do you vote for someone like Bachmann hoping that she goes down in flames but with the fear that she might possibly win or do you vote for one of the supposed moderates like Romney or Huntsman because you're thinking well, if we are going to have a Republican president who will do the LEAST amount of damage?


    I Went Through the Republicans for Clinton (none / 0) (#10)
    by ScottW714 on Thu Jun 30, 2011 at 01:18:09 PM EST
    ... non-sense here in TX.  Anyone that purposely votes for someone they don't support, legal or not, to manipulate an election is IMO anything but an American.  Real Americans don't game the very system that makes it great.

    CST, you may be on my side with the issues, but your fixation on winning at all costs is ugly.  Wishing you could vote for someone you hate in hopes of changing the outcome is straight out of the Rush Limbaugh playbook, literally.

    Voting for a man because he's not the enemy is how we ended up with GWB.  We don't have to get in the mud to beat them or use dirty tricks or give our candidates passes on their lackluster performance in hopes that we can keep the power for 4 more.


    you have a much higher view of (none / 0) (#11)
    by CST on Thu Jun 30, 2011 at 01:34:10 PM EST
    "the system" than I do.

    I wouldn't vote in the Republican primary for someone I hate in hopes they would lose, I would vote for the person who I think would do the best job out of the candidates on the ballot.  If you think it's Unamerican for me to express my opinion, than I don't know what to tell you.  

    Voting for someone because we think there is no difference between Republicans and Democrats is how we ended up with GWB.

    You call it "winning at all costs", I call it caring.  I've never considered voting to be a dirty trick.

    I am really sick of this "real American" $hit.  Who the f*ck are you to decide what "real American" behavior is?