Why is any good news about the economy qualified with "but" or "however"?

[elocs]

"Unemployment claims went down but..." "More jobs were created however..."

Cannot good news be taken for what it is--good news? Certainly the economy is not where it should be, but can we not be happy when it is moving in the right direction?

[SpiralHawk]

1. Answer: RepubliCorp Media

Ptooooey.

[Skidmore]

6. combined with those on the

left who are willing to help them.

[TheKentuckian]

2. Because there is a always a critical "but" or "however". We are far from certain it is moving in the

right direction.

You do understand that only so much blood is going to flow at a given time.

We aren't losing 750k jobs a month anymore seems positive but it could mean that after losing such an absurd amount of jobs for a period that there is a lot less "fat" to cut at this time.
The job losses are to a large extent a way to profit and to reset the wage scale again.

[OneTenthofOnePercent]

3. Because the economy still sucks right now.

Until the Massive unemployment shrinks and the housing market actually picks up, the economy is in the shitter.

[Edweird]

4. Because the "good news" isn't actually good.

[elocs]

7. Now I get it! In this Bizarro World good news is actually bad, bad news is in reality good news.

Now that I have my Little Orphan Annie Decoder Ring all is made clear. :bounce: :crazy:

[Edweird]

9. The economy sucks for real people. That's the reality. "Jobless recovery" = BS

Corporations are making out great - but, as a rule of thumb, what is good for corporations is generally bad for citizens. If you need a Little Orphan Annie Decoder Ring to figure that out......:wtf:

[elocs]

10. So do any of the real people who have gotten jobs not count either?

Nobody is claiming that happy days are here again, but any improvement for real people is good news. I am currently unemployed and I am "real people" and I can understand that. Any improvement is good news for what it is, not that everything is all better.

[ipaint]

5. Because the "buts" and "howevers" are left out to give the impression

the economy is recovering. Why are they consistently left out of the analysis?

[SOS]

8. The whole thing is a house of cards

The country has been "deregulated" and subsequently swindled for 30 years.
It can't be put right in two years, or in ten years.

At today's level of job growth it will take until 2017, just to get back to the levels of 2007.
We're living in a lost decade and it's just beginning.

It's hard to have a rosy outlook when you read that the US taxpayer is facing a $24 trillion bill for Wall Street malfeasance:

"U.S. taxpayers may be on the hook for as much as $23.7 trillion to bolster the economy and bail out financial companies, said Neil Barofsky, special inspector general for the Treasury’s Troubled Asset Relief Program."

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=newsarchive&sid=aY0tX8UysIaM