I remember 1981. 10% unemployment was treated like a national Disaster

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

The last time we had an economy anywhere near this bad it led the news evey night and the coverage was mostly about people.

When giant businesses went under it was reported primarily in terms of JOB losses, not stock valuation losses.

Coverage of mega-corporations was not the norm. It was before the go-go 1980s stock market fetishism. (And before the 401K tied everyone's personal security to the fate of corporations that were not really aligned with their interests, and would would kill them if there was a nickel in it.)

The employment situation was viewed as an acute and intolerable crisis, like a wildfire or flood.

The biggest news angle was the rise of homelessness. (The idea of people living on sidewalks was new to most folks.)

Today 10% unemployment is covered as an economic abstraction.

Ronald Reagan really messed up how we see ourselves and our nation.

[Craftsman]

1. Also back then the major news oulets were not owned by major corps.

[RepublicanElephant]

20. bingo! corporations don't want people thinking too hard and getting too riled-up...

they may want a revolution.

[Romulox]

2. The Democratic Party daren't appear too "populist".

Unemployment is for little people. :shrug:

[WI_DEM]

3. I've read that Obama is working on another economic package for the unemployed.

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

4. Good on that!

[Tansy_Gold]

5. If it isn't a "package" to bring back jobs, it won't work. n/t

[avaistheone1]

6. True. Unless these are sustainable jobs, the package would be a temporary bandaid.

[Jennicut]

11. True. But 20 years of damage won't get solved in 1 to 2 years.

We really have not addressed what we need to do to replace the jobs lost from manufacturing, we have not totally addressed the issues from letting corporations run wild and allowing them to simply move overseas, the damage free trade did to us.
It is too bad Van Jones is gone, he really had some good ideas about where some new jobs could come from.

[Politics_Guy25]

13. BAD IDEA

The unemployed don't need a government bailout package. They need a package that would stimulate growth to give them a job (if a new stimnulus is presented)

[Love Bug]

17. Actually, we need both

We need a program that will stimulate job growth AND an extension of unemployment benefits to help tide us over until businesses start hiring again. I've been unemployed almost a year and there is NOTHING OUT THERE. Businesses are still shedding jobs. The latest stats say there are 7 looking for every open position -- so what is going to happen to the six who don't get hired? Are they just supposed to live in their cars?

Please don't call it a bailout package. We need those benefits to live.

[uponit7771]

19. Yeap, an extension of HC benefits and UE to the states with 8.5%+ UE rate

[CountAllVotes]

7. I remember 1980-1981 too

and yes, I had a job and yes, I changed jobs and rather easily found another at that time. The pay was abt. $18,000.00 a year which was not bad at the time - not bad even now.

I do not remember any panic.

What I do remember is there were no 401Ks. Reagan was busy looting We the People's bank accts. in other ways however.

It is Reagan's fault that the USA is in the mess it is right now and *pew* does his stink ever last forever. :puke:

:kick:

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

8. Probably some regional differences

I recall the sudden appearance of large numbers of urban homeless (combination of economy and de-institutionalization) as a national shock.

But I was in one of the hardest hit cities, homelessness-wise

That said, I dialed back the OP langauge a little.

[Fire1]

14. Same here. There was no housing crisis with unscrupulous

lending practices that I recall. I had several jobs during this time and so did everybody else. Cities weren't bankrupt and the Big three was still going strong.

[Hello_Kitty]

9. In the meantime we had Alan Greenspan and his cockamamie ideas

One of which was that a high unemployment rate was "good" because it kept wages and inflation in check. Sadistic fuck.

[Fire1]

16. That's not his biggest piece of propaganda. Greenspan is

the puppet that sold the American people via the media the bill of goods to 'refinance!' Told everybody, "YOUR HOUSE IS A PIGGY BANK, USE IT!" Then when they DID, they owed more on the house than it was worth and the banks took the property. End of story.

[uponit7771]

21. If you've seen him latetly his whole reason for not slowing down the money in the last 20 yrs

...was we wouldn't have a robust economy as if the American people are just swimming in prosperity now.

[FrenchieCat]

10. No panic in California reported on the high unemployment rate.....

Which I guess is why Reagan got re-elected a few years later.

As for homelessness, I thought that had to do with Reagan letting the
Mentally unstable out of our nation's hospitals.

I remember the saying, Reagan was an equal opportunity President; White or Black,
you could be out on your ass at any moment.

[OHdem10]

12. Since this time it is result of serious Globalization Crisis(Jobs not

coming back) they want as little discussion as possible.

[Hello_Kitty]

18. Yup. eom

[Armstead]

15. And remember the subsequent Orwellian Double-Speak that set the stage for the Big Scams

The late 1970's and early 1980's set the stage for coverage that convinced the population that what was bad for the economy and their own situation was actually good for them.

People got so scared that they bought into crap like tossing out Anti-Trust regulations and allowing the formation of huge Corporate Monopolistic Monoliths. The basic message whenever these occurred was "We need to eliminate competition to preserve competition.

Related to that was the elimination of jobs in these mergers. "We have to lose jobs to protect your job."

That also led to the Globalization Scam, where the race to the bottom was touted as a rising tide that would lift all boats. "We have to ship your job to some overseas sweatshop to protect the domestic economy." Huh? Isn;t gthe domestic economy based on jobs?

When the media and politicians went along with this, the people had nowhere to turn, so they bought into the fantasy that ruining the economy would be beneficial for them. Hence the rise of Rush Limbaugh Conservatism, in which working class people were made to identify with the interests of the wealthy -- even though that was ultimately against their own actual self-interest.