AP - WASHINGTON –
The startling news that the economy lost 80,000 jobs last month and nearly a quarter-million over the last three months is the starkest signal yet that the country has probably fallen into a recession, with things on the job front expected to get worse.
"All the indicators suggest that we will see even larger job declines in coming months. Businesses are getting nervous and pulling back," said Mark Zandi, chief economist at Moody's Economy.com.
While the downturn is expected to be short and mild, economists are still forecasting the unemployment rate, which jumped to 5.1 percent in March, will climb much higher before the nation's job engine sputters back to life.
Economists are forecasting a jobless rate that will peak at around 6 percent, but probably not until early next year, several months after the recession is expected to end. Analysts said as many as 2 million people could lose their jobs in the current downturn.
...the falling value of the dollar against many foreign currencies is helping to power an export boom, which is benefiting farmers and some segments of manufacturing, particularly airplane makers and factories producing various types of heavy machinery where the United States enjoys a competitive edge.
... Domestic automakers have been laying off workers in the face of slumping sales as the weak economy and soaring gasoline prices cut into demand. General Motors and Chrysler reported U.S. sales were down 19 percent in March compared with a year ago, while sales at Ford fell by 14 percent.
Gault said he expected a mild recession that will end when tax rebate checks are spent this summer. He said he wasn't looking for as big a rise in unemployment as the 2001 downturn because companies have not added as many workers to their payrolls during the current expansion.
"We think companies are starting from a leaner position so they won't have to lay off as many people," he said.
RLCC Comment: The economists are selling voodoo. The fact is that the housing downturn and the rising gas prices are just going to have a longer term negative impact than they are claiming. They been trying all along to downplay the coming recession. They're trying to talk their way through it. They're trying to convince people not to tighten their belts and to keep spending. It won't work though.
It's true that people won't stop spending altogether, but the truth is that there must be a fundamental reformation of the economic system. There needs to be a complete transformation into a wholly different economic system. This current system that is based upon selfish dog-eat-dog is just devouring faster than it will ever create. That's its nature. It's a beast. It's the beast. It has to go. There's no other choice but extinction. Either humanity becomes unselfish or it goes. It's call the rule of existence on this plane.
Yahoo! News: Economy News, April 7, 2008, 12:35am, obtained via:
The following should appear at the end of every post:
According to the IRS, "Know the law: Avoid political campaign intervention":
Tax-exempt section 501(c)(3) organizations like churches, universities, and hospitals must follow the law regarding political campaigns. Unfortunately, some don't know the law.
Under the Internal Revenue Code, all section 501(c)(3) organizations are prohibited from participating in any political campaign on behalf of (or in opposition to) any candidate for elective public office. The prohibition applies to campaigns at the federal, state and local level.
Violation of this prohibition may result in denial or revocation of tax-exempt status and the imposition of certain excise taxes. Section 501(c)(3) private foundations are subject to additional restrictions.
Political Campaign Intervention
Political campaign intervention includes any activities that favor or oppose one or more candidates for public office. The prohibition extends beyond candidate endorsements.
Contributions to political campaign funds, public statements of support or opposition (verbal or written) made by or on behalf of an organization, and the distribution of materials prepared by others that support or oppose any candidate for public office all violate the prohibition on political campaign intervention.
Factors in determining whether a communication results in political campaign intervention include the following:
- Whether the statement identifies one or more candidates for a given public office
- Whether the statement expresses approval or disapproval of one or more candidates' positions and/or actions
- Whether the statement is delivered close in time to the election
- Whether the statement makes reference to voting or an election
- Whether the issue addressed distinguishes candidates for a given office
Many religious organizations believe, as we do, that the above constitutes a violation of the First Amendment of the US Constitution.
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
That said, we make the following absolutely clear here:
- The Real Liberal Christian Church and Christian Commons Project not only do not endorse any candidate for any secular office, we say that Christianity forbids voting in such elections.
- Furthermore, when we discuss any public-office holder's position, policy, action or inaction, we definitely are not encouraging anyone to vote for that office holder's position.
- We are not trying to influence secular elections but rather want people to come out from that entire fallen system.
- When we analyze or discuss what is termed "public policy," we do it entirely from a theological standpoint with an eye to educating professing Christians and those to whom we are openly always proselytizing to convert to authentic Christianity.
- It is impossible for us to fully evangelize and proselytize without directly discussing the pros and cons of public policy and the positions of secular-office holders, hence the unconstitutionality of the IRS code on the matter.
- We are not rich and wouldn't be looking for a fight regardless. What we cannot do is compromise our faith (which seeks to harm nobody, quite the contrary).
- We render unto Caesar what is Caesar's. We render unto God what is God's.
- When Caesar says to us that unless we shut up about the unrighteousness of Caesar's policies and practices, we will lose the ability of people who donate to us to declare their donations as deductions on their federal and state income-tax returns, we say to Caesar that we cannot shut up while exercising our religion in a very reasonable way.
- We consider the IRS code on this matter as deliberate economic duress (a form of coercion) and a direct attempt by the federal government to censor dissenting, free political and religious speech.
- It's not freedom of religion if they tax it.
And when they were come to Capernaum, they that received tribute money came to Peter, and said, Doth not your master pay tribute? He saith, Yes. And when he was come into the house, Jesus prevented him, saying, What thinkest thou, Simon? of whom do the kings of the earth take custom or tribute? of their own children, or of strangers? Peter saith unto him, Of strangers. Jesus saith unto him, Then are the children free. (Matthew 17:24-26)