Subscribe: RSS Feed | Twitter | Facebook | Email
Home | Contact Us

Rick Santelli : Honest Unemployment Review, May 4

Posted by Larry Doyle on May 4, 2012 11:02 AM |

Thanks to regular reader Fred for prompting me to check out CNBC’s Rick Santelli for his honest unemployment review a short bit ago.  I love somebody who cuts right to the chase. Santelli does just that.

Take the mere two minutes to view this clip so you have a real understanding as to the state of our labor market today. 

Thank you, Fred…now we can all navigate accordingly!!

If you do not get this link via e-mail distribution, then please go here.

Larry Doyle 

Isn’t it time to subscribe to all my work via e-mail, an RSS feed, on Twitter or Facebook?

I have no affiliation or business interest with any entity referenced in this commentary. The opinions expressed are my own. I am a proponent of real transparency within our markets so that investor confidence and investor protection can be achieved.

  • Huckleberry

    I don’t know, LD. While those numbers are undoubtedly stark, Santelli is a hack, and his “straight talk” seems like it is spoken with a forked tongue.

    To wit: unless I am mistaken, Santelli waved his arms and yelled a lot, but he never actually opposed the Bush TARP bailout. But as soon the talk came to helping home-buyers, he began ranting about the problem with “subsidizing losers’ mortgages” and said that policy should “Reward people that could carry the water rather instead of drink the water.” Sounds pretty inconsistent to me.

    • fred


      Maybe the inconsistency is in your position not Santelli’s.
      On the one hand you probably want less gov’t interference in our lives and on the other hand you want the gov’t to subsidize “loser” mortgages.

      I don’t know the specifics to which you make reference, but I’m sure Santelli’s comments may have been directed at strategic defaulters who could have, but chose not too, honor the terms of their mortgage. A strategic default and a hardship default are vastly different, one tears at the moral fabric of America while the other brings out the best of America; a mortgage workout, extended unemployment benefits, subsidized housing, welfare, food stamps, medicare, etc.

      In regards to TARP, w/o TARP, some of the big banks probably would have failed because naked shorts were mercilessly pounding banking shares and mark to market doesn’t necessarily reflect the reality of value in a non functioning market. In all the excitement, many banks probably would have failed.

      H, have you seen the insurance $$ balance in the FDIC, the failure of even one ‘too big to fail bank’ would have had reverbirating repercussions, most likely leaving many depostors w/o access to the money in their bank accounts.

      Now the reclassification of GS as a commercial bank, in order to qualify for TARP funding, is a seperate issue.
      The fact that bank creditors were not required to assume more, if not all, of the financial responsibility of the ‘banking crisis’ rather than the american public, a seperate issue. The fact that noone has yet to be held accountible either through executive bonus clawbacks, termination or prosecution, is a crime by our regulators toward us all.

      H, although we obviously share differences in our opinion, I think we can both agree that the gov’t should ALWAYS be looking out for the ‘public interest’ rather than special interest and regulators need a ‘wake up call’ or be ‘shown the door’.

    • A. Eller

      You haven’t been listening, Mr. Huckleberry. R. Santelli has always opposed the TARP bailouts. Wake up, please.

  • Obsvr-1

    Good for RIck, at least he highlights that fact that just providing the Headline Unemployment Rate is incomplete (disingenuous or intellectually dishonest).

    Every report on Employment/Unemployment should include the Headline Rate, U6 Rate and Labor Participation Level – PERIOD.

    Maybe Rick can stimulate another round of Tea Party action to get folks to vote the rascals out !!!

  • Huckleberry

    Anyone with any sense (on cents or anything else) has known for years that the Headline Unemployment rate was a joke. Even the U-6 likely understates the severity of the problem. If CNBC is only choosing to spin the problem of labor participation…

    But Santelli’s rant – and that is what his February 19, 2009 statement amount to – was a broadside against “losers” – utterly unspecific and certainly not directed at strategic defaulters. What I heard was a blanket denunciation of anyone who found themselves with more house than they could pay for. I never heard anything even remotely like this during the fall of 2008 with regards to the bank bailouts.

    Now if he has elsewhere said that he opposed TARP (or any of the other giveaways such as Maidenlane, ZIRP, et al, ad nauseum) I stand corrected.
    That is why I put “unless I am mistaken” in my comment. It is true that I don’t usually watch Santelli – I have found that people who have to make their points by raising their volume are rarely worth listening to. That said, I attempted to find his position, and found, at most, some griping about “uncertainty” – but nothing of the level of his “tea party” screed, which smacked of total misdirection.

    And true, I would have much rather seen working people “given” principal reductions (even if that meant a hand-out to house flippers) than what happened. Moral hazard? Sure: but I bet our demand-driven economy would be in far, far better shape had we bailed out workers rather than bankers.

    What I see now is a giant tax-burden added to generations of wage-earners by a political class owned by those who earn their living doing little aside from shuffling paper, often to no apparent social purpose. This country got along fine for most of its history with a FIRE sector of around 10-12% of the economy – I support anything that will move us back in that direction.

    And I don’t believe in the boogie-man Doomsday scenario that was trotted out to argue that we had to save the Banks or face the implosion of Civilization. This seemed designed to scare an admittedly ignorant and corrupt Congress.

    Of course, this is a Congress bought and paid for by the wealthy – Democrats and Republicans. But don’t take my word for it, however: David Stockman is on record all over the place concerning this and puts the argument far more clearly than I ever could. And he’s got a great solution: a constitutional amendment limiting all campaign contributions to $100.

    As far as I can tell, blaming captured regulatory agencies for a failure to regulate is a political argument that directs blame away from the actual criminals. Just because a cop is too lazy or stupid or corrupt to investigate a crime doesn’t mean the crime was not committed or the criminal is somehow “innocent.”

    A golden opportunity was missed in the spring of 2009 to break-up the megabanks and re-regulate the financial system. But that is past, and will not come again. Although not primarily his fault, Santelli’s rant was a small contribution to that negative outcome. Of course, I believe that the Tea Party is probably worse than useless, that the Fed should be audited, and that Timothy Geithner should be prosecuted for fraud.

    But just so I’m clear: I am not questioning LD, I just think there are far, far better people to refer to here at Sense on Cents. Like David Stockman and William Black.

    • LD


      We do not have anything in the David Stockman category, but as far as William Black…knock yourself out…

      Sense on Cents/William Black

      Black does not get regular air time like Santelli, though…plus, you know America lives and breathes on sound bites and although not typically taken to sound bites here at SoC, a few good ones every now and then are just the order.

      They come a lot worse than our man Santelli…

  • andrew

    Message? How about this…

    Bill Clinton abolished with his pen the glass steagall act – jerk
    Bush fractures the economy by looking the other way, sort of like Joe Paterno – criminal
    Obama inherits a bankrupt out of control budget and passes Obama bankruptcy – moron
    Romney wants you to show you yours but won’t show you his – thief
    All of the above are of the one party – greed & power
    Arguing over who is better is futile – sheep

    I admit I cut and pasted the following, hey duds we are in the same sinking boat punctured by the one party:

    “Experience hath shown, that even under the best forms of government those entrusted with power have, in time, and by slow operations, perverted it into tyranny.” — Thomas Jefferson

    “Let me issue and control a nation’s money and I care not who writes the laws” — Mayer Rothschild

    Wake up.

Recent Posts