WASHINGTON: A Muslim scholar chosen to speak at President-elect Barack Obama's inaugural prayer service Wednesday is the leader of a group that federal prosecutors say has ties to terrorists.

Ingrid Mattson, president of the Islamic Society of North America, is one of many religious leaders scheduled to speak at the prayer service at Washington's National Cathedral.

Mattson has been the guest of honor at State Department dinners and has met with senior Pentagon officials during the Bush administration. She also spoke at a prayer service at the Democratic National Convention in Denver.

But in 2007 and as recently as last July, federal prosecutors in Dallas filed court documents linking the Hartford, Conn.-based Islamic society to the group Hamas, which the U.S. considers a terrorist organization.

Neither Mattson nor her organization have been charged. But prosecutors wrote in July that they had "a wide array of testimonial and documentary evidence expressly linking" the group to Hamas and other radical groups.

Linda Douglass, a spokeswoman for Obama's inaugural committee, would not discuss the case or say whether the committee knew about it.

"She has a stellar reputation in the faith community," Douglass said Saturday night.

The existence of the court documents was first reported by Politico.

The Islamic Society of North America, which describes itself as "the nation's largest mainstream Muslim community-based organization," is fighting its inclusion on a list of coconspirators in the Dallas terrorism case against the Holy Land Foundation. In court documents, the group says it does not condone terrorism.

http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2009/01/17/america/Inauguration-Prayer.php

by Steven Ertelt
LifeNews.com Editor
January 20, 2009

Washington, DC (LifeNews.com) -- In less than five minutes after Barack Obama took over as the next president, the White House web site changed from pro-life to pro-abortion. The previous site, which touted the pro-life proclamation President Bush signed late last week, now includes Obama's agenda for women, which calls for promoting abortion.

Gone is any mention of the Sanctity of Human Life Day or the speeches or actions of President Bush's that promoted human life. Now, in the same color scheme and format as the Bush site, there is a celebration of Obama's agenda.

According to a web site search of WhiteHouse.gov, the only page on the official governmental site to mention abortion is a page detailing what Obama will do to promote the interests of women.

Though abortions cause women a myriad of medical and mental health problems, Obama states his clear intent, in a section entitled "reproductive choice," to make abortions even more available.

"President Obama understands that abortion is a divisive issue, and respects those who disagree with him. However, he has been a consistent champion of reproductive choice and will make preserving women's rights under Roe v. Wade a priority in his Adminstration [sic]," the Obama White House site says.

"He opposes any constitutional amendment to overturn the Supreme Court's decision in that case," it adds.

The White House page also touts Obama's backing for the Prevention First Act.

Billed as a measure to provide more funding for family planning and contraception, pro-life advocates oppose it because it sends millions of dollars to Planned Parenthood, the nation's largest abortion business that does 25 percent of the abortions across the country.

The Obama White House site also promotes the new president's view that Americans should be forced to pay for embryonic stem cell research, which involves the destruction of human life and has never helped a single patient.

The web site comes across as a false claim that government has not supported stem cell research in general, even though President Bush spent hundreds of millions of dollars promoting the use of adult stem cells -- the only kind to help any patients.

"President Obama and Vice President Biden believe that we owe it to the American public to explore the potential of stem cells to treat the millions of people suffering from debilitating and life-threatening diseases," the White House site says.

"Obama is a co-sponsor of the Stem Cell Research Enhancement Act of 2007, which will allow research of human embryonic stem cells derived from embryos donated (with consent) from in vitro fertilization clinics. These embryos must be deemed in excess and created based solely for the purpose of fertility treatment," it adds.

However, not all leftover embryos are deemed to be in excess as hundreds of babies have been born through the embryo adoption programs that exist nationwide.

http://www.lifenews.com/nat4763.html

... it would put citizens in the position of deciding whether or not they wanted their state to be one of  "those" states. My guess is that, while many people pretend to be in favor of "choice", a greater number couldn't stomach that "choice" taking place in their own back yard with their blessing. Result: few or no states would vote for being known as "The Abortion State".

WASHINGTON (AP) - President Barack Obama says the economic slump is a "continuing disaster" for America's families

Anyone happy with "change" yet?

it would put citizens in the position of deciding whether or not they wanted their state to be one of  "those" states. My guess is that, while many people pretend to be in favor of "choice", a greater number couldn't stomach that "choice" taking place in their own back yard with their blessing. Result: few or no states would vote for being known as "The Abortion State".

The problem here is that some states were the "abortion" states before Roe v. Wade. One was New York when Nelson Rockefeller still had Presidential aspirataions, so, while I agree on the desireability of allowing states to choose, I'm not sure we have much hope of a general refusal to be an abortion state.

I seriously doubt that even half of the states would go dark. In any case, at least the choice would be up to the people again and no one would have to live in (or patronize) an abortion state if he didn't want too. That's real choice.

Hey, did ya see this ad that NBC refuses to run during the Super Bowl: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qyfmtUjNJEk>

Unemployment was reaching double digits.

Inflation was around 18 percent.

Interest rates were approaching 20 percent.

Democrats and Republicans competed for who could do the most with a tax cut and Reagan carried 49 states four years later.

This time around, nothing is as bad as it was then.

Everything we are doing to combat it is the wrong thing.

Obama is desperate to be able to claim his soon-to-be-failed plans were supported by Repubicans.

No wonder he's trying to dampen expectations.

He's in so far over his head, it's almost funny.

"Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano said she was briefed before the release of a controversial intelligence assessment and that she stands by the report sent to law enforcement that lists veterans as a terrorist risk to the U.S. and defines "rightwing extremism" as including groups opposed to abortion and immigration."

--Anyone remember the days when a person could defend the birth of babies without being a target of state investigators?

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/apr/16/napolitano-stands-rightwing-extremism/

If you're like me, you sometimes wonder how police-states come into being . . . who identifies what is a thought crime and who is a potential criminal . . . why they think it is one after all these years when it was okay . . . who they should report it to . . . how the people to whom it was reported should act . . . and all the intermediate steps that go into developing mutual fear and distrust among strangers and even among friends . . . .

Wonder no longer. Pull up your easy chair and open a beer and watch bondage start . . . the Pelosian New Speak . . . . We'll see where it will lead.

"i am sure Scott Roeder couldn't agree more."

--Why? Has he ever been the target of state investigators for defending the birth of babies? If you know something that everyone else doesn't johnhp, please let us in on it.

the guy was apparently on a few watch lists.

--For "defending the birth of babies"? I'm afraid I can't buy that dagon. The guy is a cold blooded murderer.

no one is saying that he is representative of your movement

--I should hope not! I'm a pro-lifer. This character is the antithesis of my movement.

you and yours should champion investigation and surveillance of these dangerous types as it diminishes your cause

--How so? The guy has nothing to do with my cause. He is the target of my cause. He has no more value for life than a lowly abortionist. 

rather than going apoplectic when a bush commissioned finding determines justly that domestic right (and yes in limited cases left) wing groups represent a danger of committing murderous acts of terrorism.

--As a pro-lifer I support what the report calls "groups opposed to abortion". Why should holding that opinion qualify me to be targeted by federal investigators in search of terrorists.

they weren't talking about you. they were talking about people like roeder and von brun.

--The report says "groups opposed to abortion". That describes me and my Church. The report did not make the distinctions that you just did. 

so why no agreement or assistance from the far-right. that includes groups like free republic, stormfront, operation rescue and others.

--I can't speak for any of those.

i have no idea, but it is not defending life that the report was written about.

--The report? What does the report have to do with it? You placed your statement right below a quote of mine. I'm just trying to figure out what you meant. If you don't know what you meant, just say so.

It is the activity of violence mongers like Roeder, von Brunn, David Leach, and Cheryl Sullenger should be watched.

--Why are you telling me that?

This is why the groups and individuals calling themselves "right wing extremists" looked so stupid after the publication of the report; they were openly identifying themselves with people who legitimate and carry out violence in the name of the political stance.

--I'm not sure what to say to that johnhp. I wasn't aware that there were "groups and individuals calling themselves 'right wing extremists'". Actually it sounds rather bizarre. Would you mind identifying one or two of these and cite exactly where they called themselves those things?

Thank you.

It makes sense. You guys are all about politics in a paranoid style. End of story. i am not going around your little merry go round on this.

--Forget about the politics of it johnhp. I'm interested in your statement for purely sociological reasons. I've never heard of any "groups or individuals calling themselves 'right wing extremists'." I'll be happy to drop out of this conversation immediately if you'll just give me the name of one of these groups or individuals and the occasion on which they called themselves "right wing extremists". I can do the rest of the research from there by myself. Thanks in advance.

Mornac's question was where the rightwing extremists identified themselves as right-wing extremists. That language came from YOUR post -- not from the report.

Take another shot at it and this time try to make it work. Give it your best shot this time, why don't you.

Maybe you and Dagon are on to something with these "Err . . ." and "Um . . . " introductions. I'll have to think about that.

clarification.

Mornac,

i have no idea, but it is not defending life that the report was written about. It is the activity of violence mongers like Roeder, von Brunn, David Leach, and Cheryl Sullenger should be watched.

This is why the groups and individuals calling themselves "right wing extremists" looked so stupid after the publication of the report; they were openly identifying themselves with people who legitimate and carry out violence in the name of the political stance.

For your convenience, I have boldfaced the exact part of the whole that we are asking about.

Because I know your reading disability so well, I will now repeat those words here: "calling themselves 'right wing extremists' looked so stupid after publication of the report"

To further reduce the burden on your overstressed brain-pod, I bold-faced, italicized, and underlined those words in the repeated section.

With these little clues in place, I challenge you to cite one single group of the several you referred to as calling themselves right wing extremists.

Thank you in advance for the candor and quality-thinking that goes into your response to this request for the clarificationn of your own words as only you can clarify them.

There is no stress or strain at all. When conservatives make the claim that a report about right wing extremists is targeting them, they are identifying themselves as right wing extremists.

But when David Letterman makes a joke about a girl getting knocked up in the 7th Inning stretch, he wasn't talking about the girl who was there at the game. He was talking about the one who was in Alaska at the time.

Got it, JohnPhD. Thank you.

You wrote:

He was telling a bad joke about the Palin daughter who got knocked up. Apparently it was premised on the notion that girls who have premarital sex are promiscuous and a baseball player who also can't keep it in his pants. It was a bad joke, poorly executed and in bad taste.

You think Palin and her daughters deserved to be the butts of this joke. Have the courage to stand up for your convictions. Your claims of how bad the joke was stand out in black and white contrast with your past comments on Palin. Be consistent if not honest.
 

Catholic League president Bill Donohue comments on the fate of African American women, and their children, in the nations capital:

Following the lead of President Barack Obama, the House of Representatives passed a bill yesterday that would allow the District of Columbia to fund abortions. Also following Obamas wishes, the same bill affirmed the earlier congressional decision to end school vouchers there.

Something doesn't add up. Last night in New York, Obama spoke at the 100th anniversary celebration of the NAACP, saying, "No one has written your destiny for you." That's certainly true of the crowd "clad in tuxedos and ball gowns," as the New York Times described them. But what about the African American children in the nations capital about to be born? Thanks to what happened yesterday, the road is being paved to insure that publicly financed abortionists will control the destiny of a large segment of the black poor.

Here's what it comes down to: indigent African American pregnant woman in D.C. will be told that if they decide to abort their baby, the government will pay for it. But if they persist in bringing their baby to term, the government will not help them to avoid the same lousy public schools that Barack and Michelle shunned for Sasha and Malia.

Either way, this sounds like a death warrant. That this cruel concept of choicepublic funds for aborting the children of the poor but not a dime for school choiceis coming from the champions of the poor is all the more despicable. By contrast, they make ordinary rednecks look positively harmless.

http://www.catholicleague.org/release.php?id=1645

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - For the first time, more than 34 million Americans received food stamps, which help poor people buy groceries, government figures said on Thursday, a sign of the longest and one of the deepest recessions since the Great Depression

Enrollment surged by 2 percent to reach a record 34.4 million people, or one in nine Americans, in May, the latest month for which figures are available.

It was the sixth month in a row that enrollment set a record. Every state recorded a gain in participation from April. Florida had the largest increase at 4.2 percent.

Food stamp enrollment is highest during times of economic stress. The U.S. unemployment rate of 9.5 percent is the highest in 26 years.

Average benefit was $133.65 in May per person. The economic stimulus package enacted earlier this year included a temporary increase in food stamp benefits of $80 a month for a family of four.

http://www.forbes.com/feeds/reuters/2009/08/06/2009-08-06T152646Z_01_N06328040_RTRIDST_0_FOODSTAMPS-USA_print.html

(AFP) 12 hours ago

WASHINGTON The US budget deficit reached 1.3 trillion dollars for the current fiscal year in July, official data showed, news set to fuel opposition to US President Barack Obama's ambitious health care and climate change proposals.

The deficit for the first 10 months of fiscal year 2009, which began October 1, reached 1.3 trillion dollars, close to 880 billion dollars greater than the deficit recorded through July 2008, said the US Congressional Budget Office (CBO).

Outlays rose by almost 530 billion dollars, or 21 percent, and revenues fell by more than 350 billion dollars, or 17 percent, compared with the amounts recorded during the same period last year, the non-partisan CBO said.

The new data was likely to stoke Republican opposition to Obama's plans to remake the US health care system and enact sweeping legislation to battle climate change, as well as fuel criticism of his handling of the economy.

Republicans have charged that the nearly 800-billion-dollar economic stimulus package Obama and his Democratic allies pushed through earlier this year only swells the deficit and has not paid off in jobs recovered.

The president late Thursday declared America may be seeing the beginning of the end of its economic nightmare, and fired a blistering attack on his Republican critics.

"The recession was years in the making, it didn't just start last month. That bank crisis didn't happen on my watch. Let's get the history straight," he said in a fiery and partisan speech reminiscent of his barnstorming 2008 election rhetoric.

The president argued that his mammoth 787-billion-dollar rescue plan and other emergency measures had stopped the economy's free-fall and cut the rate of job losses.

"We may just be seeing the very beginnings of the end of this recession," he said.

Obama cranked up his counter-attack as a new poll suggested voter patience may be wearing thin with his economic rescue effort, with his sky-high job approval rating slumping to 50 percent, the lowest since his inauguration.

The Quinnipiac University poll rating was a significant dip from the 57 percent Obama enjoyed on July 2, and followed a month of fierce battles of his economic rescue plans and signature healthcare reform.

The White House is also bracing for new unemployment figures due Friday that analysts expect to show the jobless rate climbing to a 26-year high of 9.6 percent, ever closer to the politically perilous 10-percent mark

http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5hAAhDJ_IAwKglPuq8VnzLGW4Rblg

http://thehill.com/leading-the-news/deficit-grew-by-181-billion-in-july-2009-08-09.html

Federal deficit higher in July, $1.27T this year

Record federal deficit climbs higher, $180.7 billion in July, $1.27 trillion so far this year

• By Martin Crutsinger, AP Economics Writer
• On Wednesday August 12, 2009, 3:07 pm EDT

WASHINGTON (AP) -- The federal deficit climbed higher into record territory in July, hitting $1.27 trillion with two months remaining in the budget year.

The Treasury Department said Wednesday that the July deficit totaled $180.7 billion, slightly more than the $177.5 billion economists had expected.

The Obama administration is projecting that when the current budget year ends on Sept. 30, the imbalance will total $1.84 trillion, more than four times last year's record-high.

The soaring deficits have raised worries among foreign owners of U.S. Treasury securities including the Chinese, the largest holder of such debt.

Massive amounts of government spending to combat the recession and stabilize the U.S. financial system have pushed the deficit higher. The cost of wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, along with depleted government tax revenues, also are major factors.

The July deficit reflected government spending of $332.2 billion, a record amount for any month and up from outlays of $263.3 billion in July 2008. Of that increase, about $25 billion reflected the fact that Aug. 1 was a Saturday this year, requiring many government benefit checks to be sent out earlier and counted as spending in July.

Government receipts totaled $151.5 billion, down 5.6 percent from a year ago. It marked the 15th consecutive month that government receipts have been lower than the same month in the prior year, illustrating how deep the recession has cut into tax receipts.

Through the first 10 months of the budget year, receipts total $1.74 trillion, down 16.9 percent from the same period in 2008.

Outlays totaled $3 trillion over the past 10 months, up 21.1 percent from the same period in 2008. The resulting deficit of $1.27 trillion compares to an imbalance of $388.6 billion during the year-ago period. The deficit for all of 2008 was $454.8 billion, the current record holder in dollar terms.

President Barack Obama's economic team sought to reassure the Chinese during high-level talks last month that the administration is committed to reducing the deficits once the current economic and financial crises have been resolved.

So far, interest rates have remained low as the Federal Reserve has kept the federal funds rate, a key short-term interest rate at a record low near zero in an effort to jump-start the economy. At the end of a two-day meeting Wednesday, Fed officials repeated their view that the weak economy was likely to "to warrant exceptionally low levels of the federal funds rate for an extended period."

The concern, however, is that rates could begin rising despite the Fed's efforts if foreigners suddenly lose confidence in the government's ability to manage its debt burden.

In bond markets, prices fell Wednesday after a fairly weak auction of $23 billion in 10-year Treasury notes. The Treasury Department is auctioning a record $75 billion in debt this week.

The yield on the benchmark 10-year Treasury note, which moves opposite its price, rose to 3.75 percent from 3.70 percent ahead of the auction results and 3.67 percent late Tuesday. Bond prices jumped Tuesday as stocks fell.

Investors will track demand because a drop in buyers could force the government to increase its payout. The resulting rise in rates would raise borrowing costs for the government as well as consumers and businesses, and could end up slowing the economy.

The total public debt now stands at $11.6 trillion. Interest payments on the debt cost $452 billion last year, the largest federal spending category after Medicare-Medicaid, Social Security and defense.

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/Federal-deficit-higher-in-apf-3876319127.html?x=0&.v=5

New jobless claims rise unexpectedly to 558K

New jobless claims rise unexpectedly to 558,000, while continuing claims drop to 6.2 million

• On Thursday August 13, 2009, 8:41 am EDT

WASHINGTON (AP) -- The number of newly laid-off workers filing claims for unemployment benefits rose unexpectedly last week, while continuing claims fell sharply.

The Labor Department says new claims increased to a seasonally adjusted 558,000, from 554,000 the previous week. Analysts expected new claims to drop to 545,000, according to Thomson Reuters.

The number of people remaining on the benefit rolls fell to 6.2 million from 6.34 million the previous week. Analysts had expected a slight decline.

The four-week average of initial claims, which smooths out fluctuations, rose by 8,500 to 565,000, after falling for six straight weeks.

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/Fed-says-economy-leveling-new-apf-1948834182.html?x=0&.v=7

Jobless rate at 9.7 pct.; 216K jobs lost in Aug.

Unemployment rate rises to 9.7 percent in August, highest level in 26 years; 216,000 jobs lost

• By Christopher S. Rugaber, AP Economics Writer
• On Friday September 4, 2009, 9:30 am EDT

WASHINGTON (AP) -- The unemployment rate jumped almost half a point to 9.7 percent in August, the highest since 1983, reflecting a poor job market that will make it hard for the economy to begin a sustained recovery.

While the jobless rate rose more than expected, the economy shed a net total of 216,000 jobs, less than July's revised 276,000 and the fewest monthly losses in a year, according to Labor Department data released Friday. Economists expected the unemployment rate to rise to 9.5 percent from July's 9.4 percent and job reductions to total 225,000.

The rise in the jobless rate was partly due to the government finding that more so-called discouraged workers renewed their search for employment last month. That boosted the size of the overall civilian labor force, which usually happens as a recession winds down and optimism about finding work grows.

But as long as Americans remain anxious about their jobs, consumer spending isn't expected to rise enough to power a rebound from the recession.

And analysts expect businesses will be reluctant to hire until they are convinced the economy is on a firm path to recovery. Many private economists, and the Federal Reserve, expect the unemployment rate to top 10 percent by the end of this year.

If laid-off workers who have settled for part-time work or have given up looking for new jobs are included, the so-called underemployment rate reached 16.8 percent, the highest on records dating from 1994.

But earnings rose and the number of hours worked stayed above a recent record-low. Average hourly wages increased to $18.65 from $18.59, the department reported. Average weekly earnings increased to $617.32.

The number of weekly hours worked remained at 33.1, above the low of 33 reached in June. That figure is important because economists expect companies will add more hours for current workers before they hire new ones.

The recession has eliminated a net total of 6.9 million jobs since it began in December 2007. There are now 14.9 million Americans unemployed.

Job cuts remain widespread across many sectors. The construction industry lost 65,00 jobs. Factories cut 63,000, while retailers pared 9,600 positions. The financial sector eliminated 28,000 jobs, while professional and business services dropped 22,000. Even the government lost 18,000 jobs, as the U.S. Postal Service cut 8,500 positions.

Health care and educational services was the only bright spot, adding 52,000 jobs.

And the pace of layoffs is slowing. Job losses averaged 691,000 in the first quarter and fell to an average of 428,000 in the April-June period.

Other economic data released this week has been positive. The Institute for Supply Management, a trade group, said Tuesday that the manufacturing sector grew in August for the first time in 19 months. On Thursday, the ISM said its service sector index rose to 48.4 last month, the highest level in nearly a year. Home sales, meanwhile, have increased for several months and prices are stabilizing.

Federal Reserve policymakers said in minutes from an August meeting that they expect the economy to recover in the second half of this year. But labor market conditions are still "poor," the Fed minutes released Wednesday said, and many companies are likely to be "cautious in hiring" even as the economy picks up.

Some economists credit the Obama administration's $787 billion economic stimulus package of tax cuts and spending increases, along with the Cash for Clunkers program, with contributing to a recovery. But they worry about what will happen when the impact of the stimulus efforts fades next year.

Vice President Joe Biden defended the stimulus package Thursday against Republican critics who say it is too costly.

"The recovery act has played a significant role in changing the trajectory of our economy, and changing the conversation in this country," Biden said. "Instead of talking about the beginning of a depression, we are talking about the end of a recession."

Republicans criticized Biden's speech. "The Democrats' rhetoric on their economic experiment doesn't match with the reality of millions of Americans remaining unemployed," said Republican Party chief Michael Steele. "The stimulus was an economic experiment that failed Americans."

More job cuts were announced this week. Washington-based manufacturer Danaher Corp. said it will lay off about 3,300 of its roughly 50,000 employees, an increase from the 1,700 cuts it announced in the spring. American Airlines said it is cutting 921 flight attendant jobs as it deals with an ongoing downturn in traffic and lower revenue.

http://tinyurl.com/nmwjj8

http://tinyurl.com/klm9vg

US jobless rate reaches 9.8 percent in September

US unemployment rate rises to 9.8 percent in September, as employers cut 263,000 jobs

• By Christopher S. Rugaber, AP Economics Writer
• On Friday October 2, 2009, 9:06 am EDT

• WASHINGTON (AP) -- The U.S. unemployment rate rose to 9.8 percent in September, the highest since June 1983, as employers cut far more jobs than expected. The report is evidence that the worst recession since the 1930s is still inflicting widespread pain.

Persistently high unemployment could weaken the recovery as consumers, concerned about their jobs and incomes, restrain spending. Consumer spending accounts for about 70 percent of the U.S. economy.

The Labor Department said Friday that the economy lost a net total of 263,000 jobs last month, from a downwardly revised 201,000 in August. That's worse than Wall Street economists' expectations of 180,000 job losses, according to a survey by Thomson Reuters.

The unemployment rate rose from 9.7 percent in August, matching expectations.

If laid-off workers who have settled for part-time work or have given up looking for new jobs are included, the unemployment rate rose to 17 percent, the highest on records dating from 1994.

More than a half-million unemployed Americans gave up looking for work last month. Had they continued searching, the official jobless rate would have been higher.

All told, 15.1 million Americans are now out of work, the department said. And more than 7.2 million jobs have been eliminated since the recession began in December 2007.

Many analysts expect the economy grew at a healthy clip in the July-September quarter, technically ending the recession, but few think the recovery will be strong enough to lower the jobless rate. Most economists expect the rate to top 10 percent and keep climbing.

The economy has received a boost from the Cash for Clunkers auto rebate program and other government stimulus efforts, but many economists believe that growth will slow in the current quarter and early next year as the impact of those programs fade.

Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke said Thursday that even if the economy were to grow at a 3 percent pace in the coming quarters, it would not be enough to quickly drive down the unemployment rate. Bernanke said the rate is likely to remain above 9 percent through the end of 2010.

Hourly earnings rose by a penny last month, while weekly wages fell $1.54 to $616.11, according to the government data.

The average hourly work week fell back to a record low of 33 in September. That figure is important because economists are looking for companies to add more hours for current workers before they hire new ones.

The uncertainty that surrounds the recovery has made employers reluctant to hire. The Business Roundtable, a group of chief executives from large corporations, said earlier this week that only 13 percent of its members expect to increase hiring over the next six months.

While job losses have slowed since the first quarter of this year when they averaged 691,000 a month, the cuts actually worsened last month in many sectors compared with August.

Construction jobs fell by 64,000, more than the 60,000 eliminated in August. And service sector companies cut 147,000 jobs, more than double the 69,000 in the previous month. Retailers lost 38,500 jobs, compared to less than 9,000 in August.

Temporary help agencies eliminated 1,700 jobs, down from the previous month, but still a sign of labor market weakness. Economists see temporary jobs as a leading indicator, as employers are likely to hire temp workers before permanent ones.

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/US-jobless-rate-reaches-98-apf-93159528.html?x=0&.v=13

CBO: Budget deficit hit record $1.4T in 2009

WASHINGTON The federal budget deficit tripled to a record $1.4 trillion for the 2009 fiscal year that ended last week, congressional analysts said Wednesday.

The Congressional Budget Office estimate, while expected, is bad news for the White House and its allies in Congress as they press ahead with health care overhaul legislation that could cost $900 billion over the next decade.

The unprecedented flood of red ink flows from several factors, including a big drop in tax revenues due to the recession, $245 billion in emergency spending on the Wall Street bailout and the takeover of mortgage giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Then there is almost $200 billion in costs from President Barack Obama's economic stimulus bill, as well as increases in programs such as unemployment benefits and food stamps.

The previous record deficit was $459 billion and was set just last year.

The Obama health plan would be "paid for" with new revenues and curbs in spending. But the overhaul effort would eat up tax increases and spending cuts that could be used to bring the deficit down.

Obama has attributed the nation's dismal fiscal situation to the financial and economic crises he inherited. White House Budget Director Peter Orzsag is overseeing the administration's efforts to tackle the soaring deficit next year.

"As part of the fiscal 2011 budget, we will be putting forward proposals that return us to a fiscally sustainable path and that have lower deficits in the out-years," Orszag said in a recent Associated Press interview.

The huge deficits have raised worries about the willingness of foreigners to keep purchasing Treasury debt. The administration promises that once the recession is over and the financial system is stabilized, it will move forcefully to get the deficits under control.

Economists worry that the deficits could place upward pressure on interest rates in future years as the government has to offer higher rates to attract investors

Republicans pounced on the bad news.

"This new CBO data makes it clear that our children and grandchildren will end up buried under a mountain of debt if we continue taxing, spending and borrowing at these dangerous levels," House Minority Leader John Boehner, R-Ohio, said. "How many alarm bells have to be set off before Washington Democrats get serious about tackling dangerous budget deficits?"

Economists say the best measure of the deficit is to compare it with the size of the economy. On those terms, the 2009 deficit reached almost 10 percent of gross domestic product, a level not witnessed since World War II.

The White House says it wants deficits in the next few years to stabilize at or below 3 percent of GDP. But by the White House's own estimates released in August which predicted deficits averaging about 4 percent through the rest of the decade it would take several hundreds of billions of dollars in new taxes or spending curbs to just get the deficit down to 3 percent of GDP.

Those steps would easily exceed the efforts under way now to pay for Obama's health care plan. For example, bringing the 2014 deficit back in line with Obama's goals would require about $240 billion in deficit-closing steps in that year alone near the amount of revenue that would flow from the expiration of former President George W. Bush's tax cuts.

Such steps would almost certainly force Obama to break his promise to limit tax increases to the wealthy.

Other budget experts predict higher deficits that would require even more painful steps.

History has not been kind recently to presidents who tackle the deficit. President George H.W. Bush lost re-election in 1992 after violating his "no new taxes" promise. His successor, Bill Clinton, lost control of Congress in 1994 after pushing through a deficit-reduction plan laden with tax hikes.

Still, Democrats controlling Congress acknowledge they have no choice but to tackle the problem even if they inherited it from George W. Bush.

"It should be remembered that fiscal year 2009 began during the Bush administration, which left in its wake the worst recession since the 1930s, including a sharp plunge in revenues," said Rep. John Spratt Jr., D-S.C., chairman of the House Budget Committee. "But today's figures send us the latest alarm. As the economy stabilizes and starts to recover, we will have to turn our focus back to deficit reduction."

http://tinyurl.com/y89a2c6

Federal Deficit Hits All-Time High $1.42 Trillion

WASHINGTON -- The federal budget deficit has surged to an all-time high of $1.42 trillion as the recession caused tax revenues to plunge while the government was spending massive amounts to stabilize the financial system and jump-start the economy.

The imbalance for the budget year ended Sept. 30, more than tripled last year's record. The Obama administration projects deficits will total $9.1 trillion over the next decade unless corrective action is taken.

As a portion of the economy, the budget deficit stood at 10 percent, the highest since World War II, according to government data released Friday.

President Barack Obama has pledged to reduce the deficit once the Great Recession ends and the unemployment rate starts falling. But economists worry the government lacks the will to make the hard political choices to cut spending and raise taxes to get control of the imbalances.

For 2009, the government collected $2.10 trillion in revenues, a 16.6 percent drop from 2008. The plunge reflected declining income tax collections as millions of Americans lost their jobs or saw their wages cut. Corporate taxes also plummeted as the recession squeezed companies' profit margins.

Government spending last year jumped to $3.52 trillion, up 18.2 percent over 2008. The $700 billion financial bailout fund and increased spending and tax relief from the $787 billion economic stimulus program that Obama pushed through Congress in February drove the increase.

For September, a month when the government usually records surpluses, the deficit totaled $46.6 billion. That's a sharp contrast to the $45.7 billion surplus in September 2008, the last time the government's books were in the black.

In issuing the final budget figures, top administration officials said the president was determined to get control of the deficits in coming years.

"It was critical that we acted to bring the economy back from the brink earlier this year," White House budget director Peter Orszag said in a statement. "The president recognizes that we need to put the nation back on a fiscally sustainable path."

Failure to curb runaway deficits could trigger a financial train wreck that would push interest rates and inflation higher, and send the dollar crashing if foreigners suddenly started dumping their holdings of Treasury securities.

None of those problems are evident now as the worst recession since the 1930s has depressed borrowing by consumers and businesses, giving the government a break on the interest it paid this year on the record debt. Net interest payments actually fell by about $10 billion in 2009 from 2008.

But economists worry investors will grow fearful of the nation's ability to repay all the debt unless the administration and Congress begin developing credible plans to deal with the deficit problem once the recession has ended and unemployment has begun to come down.

http://tinyurl.com/yj2vpo2

Stocks swoon as worries about the economy return

Oct 30 06:36 PM US/EasternBy SARA LEPRO and TIM PARADIS

AP Business WritersNEW YORK (AP) - Grim signals about consumer spending ripped through the markets Friday, sending stocks tumbling as investors raced for safe havens.

The Standard & Poor's 500 index and the Nasdaq composite index ended with losses for October, breaking a streak of seven months of gains. The Dow Jones industrial average tumbled 250 points, erasing a gain of 200 Thursday and ending the month flat.

Drops in key barometers of the health of consumerswhat they're spending, what they're earning and how they're feelingfanned worries that an economic recovery celebrated by the market only a day earlier won't last.

The huge reversal in market sentiment reflected how desperate stock investors are to reach conclusions about how the economy is doing, and how quickly they are willing to abandon those convictions.

The about-face from Thursday to Friday in the S&P 500 index, the benchmark for many mutual funds, was the sharpest swing for since February.

"I think you have a market that is ultimately looking for its direction," said Bob Froehlich, senior managing director at Hartford Financial Services. "We really are at the inflection point. You tend to have an overreaction to both extremes."

A day after a euphoric rally pushed stocks up the largest amount in three months, on Friday investors fretted that strapped consumers won't be able to carry on a recovery in the economy that has been driven by government spending and companies boosting profits through cost-cuts.

The heaviest selling came in areas that have been stalwarts of the market's powerful climb since March: financials, technology, energy and industrials. The safest areas, like health care, consumer staples and utilities, fared somewhat better.

Investors fled to safer assets like the dollar and Treasurys.

The Dow fell 249.85, or 2.5 percent, to 9,712.73, its lowest close since Oct. 5. It was the Dow's biggest one-day percentage drop since July 2 and left the index with a meager gain of 0.005 percent for the month.

The broader S&P 500 index fell 29.92, or 2.8 percent, to 1,036.19, its biggest percentage loss since July 2. The Nasdaq dropped 52.44, or 2.5 percent, to 2,045.11.

Six stocks fell for every one that rose on the New York Stock Exchange, a virtual reversal of the tide that swept stocks higher Thursday when the government said the economy grew faster than expected in the summer.

Indicators of investor skittishness surged. The Chicago Board Options Exchange's Volatility Index, known as the market's fear gauge, soared 23 percent to its highest level since July.

Stocks began skidding after the Labor Department said personal spending fell 0.5 percent in September. The drop was in line with forecasts, but it was also the largest slide in nine months and followed a 1.3 percent jump in August fueled by the government's popular Cash for Clunkers car rebate program.

The government also said that personal income, the fuel for future spending, was flat in September compared with August.

A drop in the mood of consumers added to the day's bad news. The Reuters/University of Michigan consumer sentiment index fell to 70.6 in October from 73.5 in September. The reading was revised higher from an early estimate and was roughly in line with expectations.

"Until we get to better employment numbers, it's hard to get real income growth and real spending ... and we're just not there yet," said Kurt Karl, chief US economist at Swiss Re.

Friday was the end of the fiscal year for many mutual funds. Fund managers often sell some investments to minimize taxes for shareholders.

Bank stocks were hardest hit as traders worried about the fate of commercial lender CIT Group Inc. Billionaire investor and bondholder Carl Icahn agreed to support the company's restructuring plan and provide it with a $1 billion line of credit, but investors are still worried that the company could file for bankruptcy protection. The stock tumbled 24 percent.

Citigroup fell 22 cents, or 5.1 percent, to $4.09 after a CLSA analyst warned that the bank would write down as much as $10 billion in its fourth quarter.

Bank of America Corp. lost $1.15, or 7.3 percent, to $14.58. It was the biggest decliner among the Dow industrials. All 30 Dow stocks fell.

For the week, the Dow lost 2.6 percent, its worst drop since mid-June. The S&P 500 index fell 4 percent, its biggest slide since mid-May. It lost 2 percent for October but is still up 53.2 percent from a 12-year low in March.

The Nasdaq fell 5.1 percent for the week and 3.6 percent for October.

On the New York Mercantile Exchange, gold fell, while oil tumbled $2.38 to $77.49 a barrel.

Bond prices surged, pushing their yields lower. The yield on the benchmark 10-year Treasury note fell to 3.39 percent from 3.50 percent late Thursday.

Stocks have lost ground the past two weeks as worries about the economy escalated. Without stronger evidence that the labor market is improving and consumers are feeling more comfortable about spending, investors will likely have trouble extending the market's gains.

Trading is likely to remain volatile in the coming week amid a flood of major economic news, including the Institute of Supply Management's readings on the manufacturing and services industries, sales reports from major retailers and the Labor Department's October employment reportarguably the month's most important piece of economic data. The Federal Reserve will convene a two-day policy meeting Tuesday.

Consolidated volume at the New York Stock Exchange came to 6.8 billion shares compared with 5.7 billion Thursday.

In other trading, the Russell 2000 index of smaller companies fell 17.45, or 3 percent, to 562.77.

Overseas, Britain's FTSE 100 fell 1.8 percent, Germany's DAX index dropped 3.1 percent, and France's CAC-40 lost 2.9 percent. Japan's Nikkei stock average rose 1.5 percent.

The Dow Jones industrial average closed the week down 259.45, or 2.6 percent, at 9,712.73. The Standard & Poor's 500 index fell 43.41, or 4 percent, to 1,036.19. The Nasdaq composite index fell 109.36, or 5.1 percent, to 2,045.11.

The Russell 2000 index, which tracks the performance of small company stocks, fell 38.09, or 6.3 percent, for the week to 562.77.

The Dow Jones U.S. Total Stock Market Indexwhich measures nearly all U.S.-based companiesended at 10.521.58, down 487.01, or 4.4 percent.

http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D9BLMKPO5&show_article=1 

Half of US kids will get food stamps, study says

Nov 2 05:01 PM US/EasternBy LINDSEY TANNER

AP Medical WriterCHICAGO (AP) - Nearly half of all U.S. children and 90 percent of black youngsters will be on food stamps at some point during childhood, and fallout from the current recession could push those numbers even higher, researchers say.

The estimate comes from an analysis of 30 years of national data, and it bolsters other recent evidence on the pervasiveness of youngsters at economic risk. It suggests that almost everyone knows a family who has received food stamps, or will in the future, said lead author Mark Rank, a sociologist at Washington University in St. Louis.

"Your neighbor may be using some of these programs but it's not the kind of thing people want to talk about," Rank said.

The analysis was released Monday in the November issue of Archives of Pediatrics and Adolescent Medicine. The authors say it's a medical issue pediatricians need to be aware of because children on food stamps are at risk for malnutrition and other ills linked with poverty.

"This is a real danger sign that we as a society need to do a lot more to protect children," Rank said.

Food stamps are a Department of Agriculture program for low-income individuals and families, covering most foods although not prepared hot foods or alcohol. For a family of four to be eligible, their annual take-home pay can't exceed about $22,000.

According to a USDA report released last month, 28.4 million Americans received food stamps in an average month in 2008, and about half were younger than age 18. The average monthly benefit per household totaled $222.

Rank and Cornell University sociologist Thomas Hirschl studied data from a nationally representative survey of 4,800 American households interviewed annually from 1968 through 1997 by the University of Michigan. About 18,000 adults and children were involved.

Overall, about 49 percent of all children were on food stamps at some point by the age of 20, the analysis found. That includes 90 percent of black children and 37 percent of whites. The analysis didn't include other ethnic groups.

The time span included typical economic ups and downs, including the early 1980s recession. That means similar portions of children now and in the future will live in families receiving food stamps, although ongoing economic turmoil may increase the numbers, Rank said.

An editorial in the medical journal agreed.

"The current recession is likely to generate for children in the United States the greatest level of material deprivation that we will see in our professional lifetimes," Stanford pediatrician Dr. Paul Wise wrote.

Wise said the Archives study estimate is believable.

"I find it terribly sad, but not surprising," Wise said.

James Weill, president of Food Research and Action Center, a Washington-based advocacy group, said the analysis underscores that "there are just very large numbers of people who rely on this program for a month, six months, a year."

"What I hope comes out of this study is an understanding that food stamp beneficiaries aren't themthey're us," Weill said.

The analysis is in line with other recent research suggesting that more than 40 percent of U.S. children will live in poverty or near-poverty by age 17; and that half will live at some point in a single-parent family. Also, other researchers have estimated that slightly more than half of adults will use food stamps at some point by age 65.

http://tinyurl.com/yjalyuz

I don't see Kansans as being a bunch of baby butchers though.

But Tiller certainly was

By V. Dion Haynes
Washington Post Staff Writer
Tuesday, November 24, 2009

These days, 24-year-old Delonta Spriggs spends much of his time cooped up in his mother's one-bedroom apartment in Southwest Washington, the TV blaring soap operas hour after hour, trying to stay out of the streets and out of trouble, held captive by the economy. As a young black man, Spriggs belongs to a group that has been hit much harder than any other by unemployment.

Joblessness for 16-to-24-year-old black men has reached Great Depression proportions -- 34.5 percent in October, more than three times the rate for the general U.S. population. And last Friday, the Bureau of Labor Statistics reported that unemployment in the District, home to many young black men, rose to 11.9 percent from 11.4 percent, even as it stayed relatively stable in Virginia and Maryland.

His work history, Spriggs says, has consisted of dead-end jobs. About a year ago, he lost his job moving office furniture, and he hasn't been able to find steady work since. This summer he completed a construction apprenticeship program, he says, seeking a career so he could avoid repeating the mistake of selling drugs to support his 3-year-old daughter. So far the most the training program has yielded was a temporary flagger job that lasted a few days.

"I think we're labeled for not wanting to do nothing -- knuckleheads or hardheads," said Spriggs, whose first name is pronounced Dee-lon-tay. "But all of us ain't bad."

Construction, manufacturing and retail experienced the most severe job losses in this down economy, losses that are disproportionately affecting men and young people who populated those sectors. That is especially playing out in the District, where unemployment has risen despite the abundance of jobs in the federal government.

Traditionally the last hired and first fired, workers in Spriggs's age group have taken the brunt of the difficult economy, with cost-conscious employers wiping out the very apprenticeship, internship and on-the-job-training programs that for generations gave young people a leg up in the work world or a second chance when they made mistakes. Moreover, this generation is being elbowed out of entry-level positions by older, more experienced job seekers on the unemployment rolls who willingly trade down just to put food on the table.

The jobless rate for young black men and women is 30.5 percent. For young blacks -- who experts say are more likely to grow up in impoverished racially isolated neighborhoods, attend subpar public schools and experience discrimination -- race statistically appears to be a bigger factor in their unemployment than age, income or even education. Lower-income white teens were more likely to find work than upper-income black teens, according to the Center for Labor Market Studies at Northeastern University, and even blacks who graduate from college suffer from joblessness at twice the rate of their white peers.

Young black women have an unemployment rate of 26.5 percent, while the rate for all 16-to-24-year-old women is 15.4 percent.

Victoria Kirby, 22, has been among that number. In the summer of 2008, a D.C. publishing company where Kirby was interning offered her a job that would start upon her graduation in May 2009 from Howard University. But the company withdrew the offer in the fall of 2008 when the economy collapsed.

Kirby said she applied for administrative jobs on Capitol Hill but was told she was overqualified. She sought a teaching position in the D.C. public schools through the Teach for America program but said she was rejected because of a flood of four times the usual number of applicants.

Finally, she went back to school, enrolling in a master's of public policy program at Howard. "I decided to stay in school two more years and wait out the recession," Kirby said.

The Obama administration is on a tightrope, balancing the desire to spend billions more dollars to create jobs without adding to the $1.4 trillion national deficit. Yet some policy experts say more attention needs to be paid to the intractable problems of underemployed workers -- those who like Spriggs may lack a high school diploma, a steady work history, job-readiness skills or a squeaky-clean background.

"Increased involvement in the underground economy, criminal activity, increased poverty, homelessness and teen pregnancy are the things I worry about if we continue to see more years of high unemployment," said Algernon Austin, a sociologist and director of the race, ethnicity and economy program at the Economic Policy Institute, which studies issues involving low- and middle-income wage earners.

Earlier this month, District officials said they will use $3.9 million in federal stimulus funds to provide 19 weeks of on-the-job training to 500 18-to-24-year-olds. But even those who receive training often don't get jobs.

"I thought after I finished the [training] program, I'd be working. I only had three jobs with the union and only one of them was longer than a week," Spriggs, a tall slender man wearing a black Nationals cap, said one afternoon while sitting at the table in the living room/dining room in his mother's apartment. "It has you wanting to go out and find other ways to make money. . . . [Lack of jobs is why] people go out hustling and doing what they can to get by."

"Give me a chance to show that I can work. Just give me a chance," added Spriggs, who is on probation for drug possession. "I don't want to think negative. I know the economy is slow. You got to crawl before you walk. I got to be patient. My biggest problem [which prompted the effort to sell drugs] is not being patient."

The economy's seismic shift has been an equal-opportunity offender, hurting various racial and ethnic groups, economic classes, ages, and white- and blue-collar job categories. Nevertheless, 16-to-24-year-olds face heavier losses, with a 19.1 percent unemployment rate, about nine points higher than the national average for the general population.

Their rate of employment in October was 44.9 percent, the lowest level in 61 years of record keeping, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics. Employment for men in their 20s and early 30s is at its lowest level since the Great Depression, according to the Center for Labor Market Studies.

Unemployment among young people is particularly troubling, economists say, because the consequences can be long-lasting. This might be the first generation that does not keep up with its parents' standard of living. Jobless teens are more likely to be jobless twenty-somethings. Once forced onto the sidelines, they likely will not catch up financially for many years. That is the case even for young people of all ethnic groups who graduate from college.

Lisa B. Kahn, an economics professor at Yale University who studied graduates during recessions in the 1980s, determined that the young workers hired during a down economy generally start off with lower wages than they otherwise would have and don't recover for at least a decade.

"In your first job, you're accumulating skills on how to do the job, learning by doing and getting training. If you graduate in a recession, you're in a [lesser] job, wasting your time," she said. "Once you switch into the job you should be in, you don't have the skills for that job."

Some studies examining how employers review black and white job applicants suggest that discrimination may be at play.

"Black men were less likely to receive a call back or job offer than equally qualified white men," said Devah Pager, a sociology professor at Princeton University, referring to her studies a few years ago of white and black male job applicants in their 20s in Milwaukee and New York. "Black men with a clean record fare no better than white men just released from prison."

http://tinyurl.com/ycqsmr8  

Obama Shatters Spending Record for First-Year Presidents

The federal government spent $3.5 trillion during President Obama's first year in office. This far exceeds the spending for any other first-year president. 

President Obama has shattered the budget record for first-year presidents -- spending nearly double what his predecessor did when he came into office and far exceeding the first-year tabs for any other U.S. president in history. 

In fiscal 2009 the federal government spent $3.52 trillion -- $2.8 trillion in 2000 dollars, which sets a benchmark for comparison. That fiscal year covered the last three-and-a-half months of George W. Bush's term and the first eight-and-a-half months of Obama's. 

That price tag came with a $1.4 trillion deficit, nearly $1 trillion more than last year. The overall budget was about a half-trillion more than Bush's for 2008, his final full fiscal year in office. 

That's a big increase. But compared with other presidents' first years in office, Obama is running circles around them. 

Bush spent $1.8 trillion in 2001, according to government budget figures that have been adjusted for inflation based on 2000 dollars. Using the same formula, former President Bill Clinton spent $1.6 trillion in 1993. 

The last president to clock in under $1 trillion was Gerald Ford, who logged a $982 billion budget in 1975. Post-war Dwight Eisenhower even brought Uncle Sam's tab down to $556 billion in his first year, 1953. 

Obama's first-year budget, adjusted for inflation, is about five times that. His 2009 budget is also close to 21 percent of that for Clinton's eight years in office -- Clinton's spending added up to $13.5 trillion over his two full terms. Bush spent $16.8 trillion from 2001-2008.

http://tinyurl.com/yl2oqf3

Dollar hits 15-month low; steepest drop since July

Nov 25 04:57 PM US/EasternBy PAN PYLAS and TALI ARBEL

AP Business WritersNEW YORK (AP) - The safe-haven dollar slid to a 15-month low against the euro, was within striking distance of 14-year lows versus the yen and dipped below parity against the Swiss franc Wednesday as markets absorbed the Federal Reserve's indication that interest rates will remain at super-low levels for a while and it was not overly concerned by the U.S. currency's decline.

Against a basket of six currencies including the euro, yen and franc, the dollar fell as low as 74.245, its weakest point since August 2008 and its steepest one-day drop since July 31, said Joseph Trevisani, chief market analyst at FXSolutions.

The 16-nation euro climbed as high as $1.5142 Wednesday, its strongest level since August 2008. In late New York trading, it read $1.5139 from $1.4975 late Tuesday.

The break above $1.51 sets the dollar up for possible steep drops this weekend.

Stuart Bennett, senior foreign exchange strategist at Calyon Credit Agricole, said there's now a chance that the euro's breakthrough opens the way for a "rapid" move higher, especially if stocks remain well-bidfor much of the past year, the dollar has moved in opposite direction to stocks.

"The market is completely onboard for this," said Trevisani. The jump above $1.51 ahead of the thin trading of the Thanksgiving weekend set the dollar up for some big potential losses, he said.

The dollar also fell to 87.40 Japanese yen from 88.56 yen, after earlier falling to 87.19 yen, its weakest level since January and close to 14-year lows.

Meanwhile, the dollar fell to 99.66 Swiss francs from 1.0082 francs, dropping below parity for only the second time ever.

It dropped below 1 franc for the first time on March 14, 2008.

The renewed slump in the dollar was driven largely by the publication Tuesday of the minutes to the Fed's last rate-setting meeting on Nov. 3-4.

The Fed said at the time that it plans to keep interest rates at "exceptionally low levels" for an "extended period"currently the Fed funds rate stands at a range between zero and 0.25 percentand that the fall in the dollar had been "orderly."

Currency traders seized on the reference to the dollar as the Fed is usually wary of talking about changes in currency values.

Traditional interest rate differences are likely to underpin further dollar losses, analysts say. The U.S. interest rate is among the lowest in the world.

"Risk remains the key driver for foreign exchange markets, but rate differentials are becoming more relevant," said Bennett.

What happens toward the end of the year isn't necessarily indicative of how traders will view the dollar next year, however, as banks wind down trades and investors book profits. And in thin holiday trading, that means steep swings can easily occur in either direction.

"December could end up being quite wild on a day to day basis," said David Watt, senior currency strategist at RBC Capital in Toronto. The dollar could jump "from one polar extreme to the other."

Also on Wednesday, some economic reports pointed to a recovery in the U.S., helping send stocks higher and the dollar lower. The Standard & Poor's 500 was up 0.4 in afternoon trading.

The safe-haven dollar tends to trade inversely to more risky equities, as well as commodities and emerging-market currencies whose countries have maintained higher interest rates.

On Wednesday, the Labor Department reported a drop in unemployment claims to the lowest level of the year last week. The Commerce Department, meanwhile, said sales of new homes rose last month to the highest level in more than a year, and consumer spending rose a brisk 0.7 percent last monthafter a 0.6 percent drop in September.

Orders for expensive manufactured goods, however, dropped for the first time since August.

In other trading, the dollar fell to 1.0457 Canadian dollars from 1.0577, while the Australian dollar jumped to 93.18 U.S. cents from 92.04 U.S. cents and the New Zealand dollar gained to 73.09 U.S. cents from 72.60 U.S. cents.

The greenback also notched big drops against Scandinavian currencies and the Hungarian forint.

http://tinyurl.com/ybmzwkk