Another Republican President, Another Recession.

[HGCC]

It puts me in such a weird bind man. The reddit crew are exploiting the market...but its against people that are terrible so meh. The losers do have some tax dodges, its not like they are gonna be on the hook for the full amount.

 

[Dryxi]

It might make shorting a company a bigger gamble, thus better practices? Of course once the hedge managers get their reddit crew in line they could be doing the same stuff lol it's a rabbit hole, I am happy I get to watch from the sidelines

 

[potroastV2]

You guys are mostly clueless. Simply said, investors on the internet got wind of the over-shorted company and seized on the opportunity. It's nothing new, and called a short-squeeze, and has been around since there were short sellers. Most of the shorted shares were held by institutions (hedge funds) and they are the ones who have taken it in the shorts (hehe) and they knew that's the risk they take. You can bet they are already shorting it again to recoup their losses.

It's the individual investor who will need to understand what to do and when. Decisions, decisions.

 

[Fogdog]

This guy knows whats up.

not really, I just read something.

 

[Dryxi]

You guys are mostly clueless. Simply said, investors on the internet got wind of the over-shorted company and seized on the opportunity. It's nothing new, and called a short-squeeze, and has been around since there were short sellers. Most of the shorted shares were held by institutions (hedge funds) and they are the ones who have taken it in the shorts (hehe) and they knew that's the risk they take. You can bet they are already shorting it again to recoup their losses.

It's the individual investor who will need to understand what to do and when. Decisions, decisions.

I think the difference is short sellers are forced to be transparent about who and how they are shorting. This is relatively new, and has only been around since the financial crash

 

[potroastV2]

I think the difference is short sellers are forced to be transparent about who and how they are shorting. This is relatively new, and has only been around since the financial crash

Sorry Man, do you mean the Crash in 1929?

I was a stockbroker in the '80's and always looked for a chance to squeeze some short sellers. There was a crash in '87 too. Maybe you are referring to that one.

 

[V256.420]

The more I look at this...my boner grows. Its really a case of a bunch of little guys getting together and taking down some rich folks, don't let the reporting sway you. It does bother me as they are exploiting the hell out of a loophole/glitch or whatever you want to call it, and I think that's bad for the overall stock market, but well...that stuff exists. It blows a hole in efficient market theory, which I think is a bogus view.

Woah there! You had me at the end of the first sentence. I could hardly read after that

 

[hanimmal]

https://apnews.com/article/biden-coronavirus-aid-plan-update-d486569860a84de146bf9f27a89eed30

WASHINGTON (AP) — President Joe Biden warned Friday of a steep and growing “cost of inaction” on his $1.9 trillion COVID relief plan as the White House searched for “creative” ways to win public support for a package that is getting a cold shoulder from Senate Republicans.

In the age of COVID, it’s not as simple as jumping on a plane to travel the country and try to gin up a groundswell. And at a time of deep polarization, Biden may struggle to convince Republican voters of the urgency when Congress already has approved $4 trillion in aid, including $900 billion last month.

Biden signaled on Friday for the first time that he’s willing to move ahead without Republicans.

“I support passing COVID relief with support from Republicans if we can get it,” he told reporters. “But the COVID relief has to pass. No ifs, ands or buts.”

His message so far has been that a fresh $1.9 trillion in aid would be a bargain compared to the potential damage to the world’s largest economy if it doesn’t pass. An aggressive push for vaccinations and generous aid to individuals would help put parents back to work and let children return to school and improve their lifetime earnings, Biden said at a Friday meeting with Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen. They met in the Oval Office, where the fireplace was lit to protect against the chill in Washington.

“We have learned from past crises that the risk is not doing too much,” he said. “The risk is not doing enough.”

Only a week into his presidency, Biden is confronting the challenge of selling his first major piece of legislation to a country he has pledged to unite. Private calls with Republican lawmakers have yet to produce any progress on reaching a deal, while Senate Democrats are now preparing to pass the measure strictly on partisan lines as soon as next week.

Some Biden allies have expressed frustration that the administration has not more clearly defined what the massive legislation would actually accomplish. The new president instead has largely focused his first nine days in office on signing executive orders rolling back his predecessor’s policies.

In particular, Biden, for whom the widespread distribution of coronavirus vaccines will be a defining test, has not explained what the increased money for testing and vaccination would achieve -- including how much quicker the White House believes it would help bring about an end to the pandemic.

Biden’s outreach to senators has largely brought criticism that the plan should be more targeted and that the country can afford to wait to see the effects of the stimulus dollars that were approved in December.

Republican lawmakers see a need for speeding vaccinations, but one Senate aide said their offices are not being bombarded with calls for an additional aid package. Constituents are more focused on the looming impeachment trial, said the aide, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss private conversations.

This has left the Biden team trying to expand its outreach beyond Capitol Hill.

IMPACT ON THE ECONOMY:

• – US employment costs rise modestly in fourth quarter
• – US consumer spending fell 0.2% in December in face of virus
• – AP FACT CHECK: Biden’s fuzzy math on 1 million new auto jobs

White House press secretary Jen Psaki said Biden recognizes the importance of speaking directly to the American people about his plan for vaccinations and supporting the economy, but the pandemic has limited his ability to safely travel to drum up support. The administration is relying on TV interviews by White House officials and allies with local media and national shows like “The View,” as well as calls with governors, local officials and progressive and civic groups.

“We’re taking a number of creative steps, a little outside of the box,” Psaki said. “Certainly, his preference would be to get on a plane and fly around the country.”

Part of the challenge is that Biden must convince the public how different components of his proposal would work together. His plan allots $400 billion to spearhead a national vaccination program and the reopening of schools. It also includes $1,400 in direct payments to individuals, which critics say should be more targeted. And it includes a raise in the the minimum wage to $15 and aid for state and local governments, a nonstarter for most Republicans.

Many Republicans are under more political pressure from donors and activists back home to rein in spending than to approve more. Some Republicans particularly object to what are still seen by many as bailouts for cash-strapped state and local governments.

Some do support a deal, just not what Biden is offering. Sen. Rob Portman, R-Ohio, a member of a bipartisan group of legislators contacted by the administration, said he supports funds for vaccine distribution and even potentially extra jobless benefits, but he wants a full accounting of what funding remains from previous aid packages.

“Unemployment insurance, they think it’s an emergency, well we have unemployment insurance in place until mid March. Where’s the emergency?” Portman said. “Am I against extending it, no I’m not. I think we should, based on some economic factors. But it just doesn’t make sense.”

Recent economic reports show the economy is still under severe strain, yet there is also the potential for the strongest growth in more than two decades once the coronavirus is contained.

The Commerce Department said Thursday the U.S. economy shrank 3.5% last year, and on Friday it reported that consumer spending — the main driver of growth — had slumped 0.2% in December. But the consumer spending report also suggested that the expanded unemployment benefits from the $900 billion aid package passed that same month had managed to boost incomes.

Gregory Daco, an economist at Oxford Economics, said, “The COVID relief bill of December essentially addressed the past, the dwindling aid at the end of 2020,” Now the administration must sell the public on what lies ahead.

He said, “The American Rescue Plan — it’s a plan geared toward the future, bridging the gap between January and September, when people will be able to spend more freely.”

 

[mysunnyboy]

This is making CDs look pretty good to me.

 

[hanimmal]

 

[schuylaar]

Why is it bad that small players found the ability to do this?

because they're not the big players and christians hate the poor.

you are not part of the club; you will never be part of the club; to remedy? be part of the club.

 

[Fogdog]

Isn't it a contradiction that you are so much into the fight against propaganda and yet the format of that video is basically just a talking head who is telling people what to think?

I don't mind him because I mostly agree with what he's saying but I don't much care about the format where the host presents one or two minutes of actual video and then spends ten minutes telling his listener what to think.

Love most of your posts. I don't mind this one. But the format lends itself to misuse by people with the intent of influencing rather than informing.

Didn't finish it, btw. Clicked it off when the talking head started doing his thing. I scanned the rest of the vid. It was one minute of content and the rest was just him, talking. I agree with him but I don't like being told what to think. Even if I agree.

 

[hanimmal]

Isn't it a contradiction that you are so much into the fight against propaganda and yet the format of that video is basically just a talking head who is telling people what to think?

I agree with what you are saying.

I do like how this guy sticks to facts and really has some of the best clips of video that is not always as readily available. There is something to be said that even though he is opinion, he is not lying and gas lighting people.

I don't mind him because I mostly agree with what he's saying but I don't much care about the format where the host presents one or two minutes of actual video and then spends ten minutes telling his listener what to think.

I do post his videos for the clip at the front and not the commentary almost always. The only one I didn't, I actually explained that in my post.

Love most of your posts. I don't mind this one. But the format lends itself to misuse by people with the intent of influencing rather than informing.

Didn't finish it, btw. Clicked it off when the talking head started doing his thing. I scanned the rest of the vid. It was one minute of content and the rest was just him, talking. I agree with him but I don't like being told what to think. Even if I agree.

I don't think I actually finished too many of his videos either (at least since I listened to a bunch to make sure he wasn't pushing nonsense), but his clips are spot on generally. And he does bring in a lot of really good information in his rants.

Thinking a couple seconds more I bet if we actually went though his videos with a fine tooth comb we might be hard pressed to find any half truths in them, which is why I don't feel bad putting them out there. They are heads and shoulders better than 'the Hill video's for example.

Especially since he often does get into the details from the Mueller report/senate reports on the Russian military attacking our citizens I do think it is something good to get amplified. If anyone ever hears him saying something untrue though or misleading I would be very interested in taking another look. I will always keep my eyes open for it too.

 

[Fogdog]

I agree with what you are saying.

I do like how this guy sticks to facts and really has some of the best clips of video that is not always as readily available. There is something to be said that even though he is opinion, he is not lying and gas lighting people.




I do post his videos for the clip at the front and not the commentary almost always. The only one I didn't, I actually explained that in my post.


I don't think I actually finished too many of his videos either (at least since I listened to a bunch to make sure he wasn't pushing nonsense), but his clips are spot on generally. And he does bring in a lot of really good information in his rants.

Thinking a couple seconds more I bet if we actually went though his videos with a fine tooth comb we might be hard pressed to find any half truths in them, which is why I don't feel bad putting them out there. They are heads and shoulders better than 'the Hill video's for example.

Especially since he often does get into the details from the Mueller report/senate reports on the Russian military attacking our citizens I do think it is something good to get amplified. If anyone ever hears him saying something untrue though or misleading I would be very interested in taking another look. I will always keep my eyes open for it too.

He's not bad.

But people using his format are. Kyle Kulinski and Jimmy Dore come to mind. Padshystikk were continually citing them when the were bashing Hillary Clinton ahead of the 2016 election.

Looking back, a difference that I see in Cohen's clips is that he speaks evenly and with facts and logic. Kyle and Jimmy were full of vitriol and half-truths. So maybe the format isn't the problem but how the speaker used their time. Kyle and Jimmy went after an emotional reaction by fuming with anger during their speech. My criticism is probably mislaid.

 

[hanimmal]

He's not bad.

But people using his format are. Kyle Kulinski and Jimmy Dore come to mind. Padshystikk were continually citing them when the were bashing Hillary Clinton ahead of the 2016 election.

Looking back, a difference that I see in Cohen's clips is that he speaks evenly and with facts and logic. Kyle and Jimmy were full of vitriol and half-truths. So maybe the format isn't the problem but how the speaker used their time. Kyle and Jimmy went after an emotional reaction by fuming with anger during their speech. My criticism is probably mislaid.

Skepticism is not a bad thing with these things.

 

[hanimmal]

I really wanted Obama to win in 2012, and am very happy that he did. But Romney was spot on about Russia and we are paying the price as a society for that blindspot Obama had.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/us-policy/2021/02/04/romney-child-benefit-stimulus/

Sen. Mitt Romney (R-Utah) on Thursday will propose providing at least $3,000 per child to millions of American families, lending bipartisan support to President Biden’s push to dramatically expand child benefits.

Romney’s proposal would provide $4,200 per year for every child up to the age of 6, as well as $3,000 per year for every child age 6 to 17. Senior Democrats are currently drafting legislation as part of their $1.9 trillion stimulus proposal that would provide $3,600 per year for every child up to the age of 6, as well as $3,000 for every child aged 6 to 17.

The emergence of Romney’s child benefits plan as Democrats prepare a similar effort could give the White House an opportunity to incorporate policies with bipartisan support into its relief package. Romney has said Biden’s stimulus proposal is too expensive, meaning he may vote against the broader plan even if it includes much of his new child benefits proposal.

Romney’s new plan, like the one being explored by senior Democrats, would provide the benefit monthly by depositing it directly in taxpayer bank accounts. Advocates for expanding child benefits say they will make an enormous dent in child poverty in the United States, although some conservative scholars argue the benefits may discourage parents from pursuing employment. The extent of GOP support for Romney’s proposal is unclear.

Unlike Democrats’ plan, Romney’s Family Security Act would be paid for, in part, by eliminating Temporary Assistance for Needy Families, a welfare program, as well as other existing federal tax credits for children and working families. Many Democrats are likely to oppose this part of Romney’s plan.

Senior Democrats drafting plan to give parents at least $3,000 per child in Biden stimulus

Romney is expected to offer the bill as an amendment to Democrats’ budget resolution on Thursday night, according to two people who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss internal planning. The budget resolution is the vehicle for passing Biden’s stimulus package.

“We have not comprehensively reformed our family support system in nearly three decades, and our changing economy has left millions of families behind," said Romney, the GOP’s 2012 presidential nominee, in a statement. “Now is the time to renew our commitment to families to help them meet the challenges they face as they take on the most important work any of us will ever do — raising our society’s children.”

White House Chief of Staff Ron Klain reacted to the proposal on Thursday, tweeting: “Really looking forward to see what @SenatorRomney will propose here -- an encouraging sign that bipartisan action to reduce child poverty IS possible.”

The United States currently has among the highest rates of child poverty in the developed world, a trend exacerbated by the coronavirus pandemic. The nation provides less financial support to families with children than all but a handful of developed countries. That has led Democratic lawmakers such as Sens. Michael F. Bennet (Colo.) and Sherrod Brown (Ohio) to spearhead legislation to expand child benefits that command near-universal support among the Democratic caucus.

Their push is now gaining bipartisan momentum in part because of social conservatives such as Romney and Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah), who have also expressed alarm about high levels of child poverty.

Romney’s plan would have a dramatic impact on lowering child poverty, according to an analysis by the Niskanen Center, a center-right think tank. The percentage of children in poverty would fall by about 32 percent, with close to 3 million lifted out of poverty. Additionally, the percentage of children in “deep poverty” would fall by about 50 percent, meaning about 1.2 million children would be lifted out of deep poverty, the analysis found.

“Romney’s proposal shows that there’s substantial bipartisan agreement around expanding child benefits,” said Ernie Tedeschi, an economist who served in the Treasury Department under the Obama administration. “A permanent expansion along the lines of what Senator Romney or President Biden have proposed would be among the most pro-family, anti-poverty policies in a generation.”

Some liberal Democrats said Romney’s plan could be improved by maintaining the tax credits and welfare program it proposes repurposing to fund the new child benefit. “It’s misguided to undercut the policy’s poverty-reducing impact by using deep cuts in other critical forms of support for low-income people to pay for it,” said Sharon Parrott, president of the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, a Democratic-aligned think tank. “There are far better financing options that ask those who are doing the best to pitch in a little more.”

Romney’s plan would also not provide the benefit to those living in the U.S. without a Social Security number. In their 2017 tax law, the GOP stripped as many as 4 million immigrant filers from receiving the existing child tax credit — which Romney envisions repurposing for his new proposal.

Matt Bruenig, founder of the People’s Policy Project, a left-leaning think tank, said the benefits Romney’s new plan provide to poor families outweigh the potential downsides of eliminating these programs, which Bruenig said are complicated and hard for families to navigate.

On the right, Angela Rachidi, a conservative scholar at the right-leaning American Enterprise Institute, wrote last month that extending child benefits to the poorest families would “decrease employment for low-income parents.”

“When you add in other benefits nonworking people get — such as food stamps and housing assistance — [to the proposed child tax credit], you start getting $25,000 in benefits, which is where you start to get concerned about employment disincentives,” Rachidi said in an interview.

Sam Hammond, a poverty expert at the Niskanen Center, said work disincentives come from sharp declines in the values of benefits as worker income increase, something he said the Romney plan avoids.

Biden expected to include new child benefit in major new stimulus proposal

I wonder why the heavily Mormon base could possibly want this? And as I think about the fact that I am making a joke that I might be being a dick. And I apologize. Then double check...

https://www.insider.com/the-average-number-of-kids-per-family-in-every-state-2019-2

 

[hanimmal]

https://apnews.com/article/joe-biden-coronavirus-pandemic-bills-kamala-harris-c497b8cda93486d9f0a09abb88235291

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Senate early Friday approved a measure that would let Democrats muscle President Joe Biden’s $1.9 trillion coronavirus relief plan through the chamber without Republican support. Vice President Kamala Harris was in the chair to cast the tie-breaking vote, her first.

Democrats in the chamber applauded after Harris announced the 51-50 vote at around 5:30 a.m. The action came after a grueling all-night session, where senators voted on amendments that could define the contours of the eventual COVID-19 aid bill.

The budget now returns to the House, where it will have to be approved again due to the changes made by the Senate. Final passage will unlock the next phase in drafting of the virus relief bill, with the work divided among several congressional committees.

Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer D-N.Y., called passage of the resolution the “first big step to putting our country back on the road to recovery.”

By moving on a fast track, the goal for Democrats is to have COVID relief approved by March, when extra unemployment assistance and other pandemic aid expires. It’s an aggressive timeline that will test the ability of the new administration and Congress to deliver.

The push for stimulus comes amid new signs of a weakening U.S. economy. Employers added just 49,000 jobs in January, after cutting 227,000 jobs in December, the Labor Department said Friday. Restaurants, retailers, manufacturers and even the health care sector shed workers last month, with state and local governments also letting go of non-school employees.

The unemployment rate fell to 6.3% from 6.7%, but there was a decline in the number of people who were either working or looking for a job in a sign that some people are dropping out of the labor force. The U.S. economy is about 12 million jobs shy of its pre-pandemic trends.

Biden, who has been meeting with lawmakers in recent days to discuss the package, will talk Friday at the White House with the House committee chairs who will be assembling the bill under the budget process known as “reconciliation.”

Biden also plans to make remarks Friday on the economy as he keeps up the pressure on Congress to “act big” on his relief package.

With a rising virus death toll and strained economy, the president’s goal is to have COVID-19 relief approved by March, when extra unemployment assistance and other pandemic aid measures expire. Money for vaccine distributions, direct payments to households, school reopenings and business aid are at stake.

The marathon Senate session brought test votes on several Democratic priorities, including a $15 minimum wage. The Senate by voice vote adopted an amendment from Sen. Joni Ernst, R-Iowa, opposed to raising the wage during the pandemic. Ernst said a wage hike at this time would be “devastating” for small businesses.

None of the amendments to the budget are binding on Democrats as they draft their COVID plan, but passage of a wage increase could prove difficult. Even if a $15 wage can get past procedural challenges in the final bill, passage will require the support from every Democrat in the 50-50 Senate, which could be a tall order.

Sen. Bernie Sanders, a vocal proponent of the wage increase, vowed to press ahead. “We need to end the crisis of starvation wages,” he said.

 

[hanimmal]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2021/02/10/powell-unemployment-january/

Federal Reserve Chair Jerome H. Powell said Wednesday that the unemployment rate in January was “close to 10 percent,” significantly higher than the 6.3 percent rate reported by the Labor Department last week.

The discrepancy is partly due to many unemployed Americans being misclassified as employed, Powell said during a virtual speech at the Economic Club of New York. After accounting for people who have left the labor force since February 2020 and other factors, the unemployment rate is much higher than the official figure, he said.

“Correcting this misclassification and counting those who have left the labor force since last February as unemployed would boost the unemployment rate to close to 10 percent in January,” Powell said Wednesday.

The economy gained just 49,000 jobs in January as recovery sputters amid pressure from virus

The higher figure is another reflection of how the pandemic continues to constrain the labor market. The United States gained back a paltry 49,000 jobs in January. In December, the country lost 227,000 jobs.

The latest figures come as Congress debates President Biden’s $1.9 trillion coronaviruspackage, which would extend unemployment benefits, issue $1,400 in direct checks and set aside hundreds of billions of dollars to fight the pandemic.

Powell repeatedly has said that the economy’s future depends on controlling the virus. As the number of cases rose through the holiday season, the labor market’s recovery slowed. And for many service-sector workers, jobs that depend on person-to-person contact have yet to return.

Following Powell’s speech, Senate Finance Committee Chair Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) said the 10 percent unemployment rate cited by Powell reinforces “the need for the strongest possible benefits package in our COVID relief bill.”

“Federal Reserve Chair Powell’s assessment of joblessness in America is bleak,” Wyden said in a statement.

Powell noted that nearly 5 million people said the pandemic prevented them from looking for work in January. Some parents are providing full-time child care or have been forced to stay home with children during virtual schooling. Others have been deterred by fear of the virus, especially in jobs at restaurants, hotels and entertainment venues.

“We are still very far from a strong labor market whose benefits are broadly shared,” Powell said.

The Bureau of Labor Statistics has flagged undercounts in the official unemployment rate before. In May — when the unemployment rate was a reported 13.3 percent — the agency noted a “misclassification error” that had lowered the overall rate by about 3 percentage points, meaning the May unemployment rate would have been about 16.3 percent.

Powell has spoken about the discrepancy before. After the official unemployment rate fell to 7.9 percent in September, Powell said a broader, more accurate measure that adjusts for “mistaken characterizations of job status, and for the decline in labor force participation since February” would put that month’s rate at around 11 percent.

Powell has repeatedly urged lawmakers to keep relief flowing, especially for the 10 million Americans whose jobs have not returned since the pandemic began. The Fed, in turn, has no plans to raise interest rates until the labor market heals substantially.

Democrats want to give parents $250 a month. Here’s who qualifies.

As congressional Democrats rush to pass Biden’s coronavirus package, some economists worry the full thrust of the bill could be too much for the economy to handle. Some economists have questioned whether the $1.9 trillion stimulus, combined with pent-up savings that Americans are expected to unleash once the pandemic ends, could suddenly overheat the economy, triggering a rise in inflation and forcing the Fed to respond by raising interest rates.

Powell dismissed those concerns. Inflation has been low or stable for decades, and the Fed is prepared to tolerate a temporary rise in inflation over its 2 percent target, he said.

It’s possible, Powell said, that aid from Congress plus a spike in consumer spending could cause “some upward pressure on prices.”
But “my expectation is that will be neither large nor sustained,” he said.

 

[Fogdog]

Gee, I'm so very surprised and disturbed to learn that somebody was cooking the books to make Trump's economy look better than it actually was.

 

[hanimmal]

Worth visiting AP site for interactive charts.
https://apnews.com/article/jobless-claims-unemployment-ticks-coronavirus-pandemic-layoffs-857d735b808234ea45e847e3641a75e4

WASHINGTON (AP) — The number of Americans applying for unemployment benefits edged higher last week to 745,000, a sign that many employers continue to cut jobs despite a drop in confirmed viral infections and evidence that the overall economy is improving.

Thursday’s report from the Labor Department showed that jobless claims rose by 9,000 from the previous week. Though the pace of layoffs has eased since the year began, they remain high by historical standards. Before the virus flattened the U.S. economy a year ago, applications for unemployment aid had never topped 700,000 in any week, even during the Great Recession.

All told, 4.3 million Americans are receiving traditional state unemployment benefits. Counting supplemental federal unemployment programs that were established to soften the economic damage from the virus, an estimated 18 million people are collecting some form of jobless aid.



In Texas, applications for benefits surged by nearly 18,000 in the aftermath of freezing weather and power outages. And jobless claims rose by more than 17,000 in Ohio, where the weekly totals have been thrown off by potentially fraudulent claims.

Restrictions on businesses and the reluctance of many Americans to shop, travel, dine out or attend mass events have weighed persistently on the job market. Job growth averaged a meager 29,000 a month from November through January, and the nation still has nearly 10 million fewer jobs than it did in February 2020. Though the unemployment rate was 6.3% in January, a broader measure that includes people who have given up on their job searches is closer to 10%.



“Hundreds of thousands of Americans are continuing to struggle in this economy,” White House press secretary Jen Psaki told reporters Thursday. “We can’t get numb to what this represents. These are moms and dads, friends and neighbors, who will now have to worry about how they’ll support families, put food on the table and make ends meet in the midst of the pandemic.″

Psaki urged Congress to move quickly to pass President Joe Biden’s $1.9 trillion relief package, which, among other things, would provide $1,400 checks to most U.S. households.

The data firm Womply reports that 64% of movie theaters and other entertainment venues, 40% of bars and 34% of hair salons and beauty shops are closed. And on Wednesday, the Federal Reserve reported that across the country, “overall conditions in the leisure and hospitality sector continued to be restrained by ongoing COVID-19 restrictions.”

“The source of all labor market damage continues to be COVID-19,” said AnnElizabeth Konkel, economist at the Indeed Hiring Lab. “Increased vaccine distribution is promising, since the public health situation must improve for there to be a full economic recovery. When we completely return to ‘normal’ is still unknown.”

On Friday, though, economists have forecast that the government will report a strong job gain for February of near 200,000, which would raise hopes that layoffs will slow. Optimism is rising that increasing vaccinations and a new federal rescue aid package that will likely be enacted soon will spur growth and hiring in the coming months. Many analysts foresee the economy expanding at an annual rate of at least 5% in the current quarter and 7% for all of 2021.



Already, crucial sectors of the economy are showing signs of picking up as vaccinations increase, federal aid spreads through the economy and the Fed’s low-rate policies fuel borrowing and spending. Last month, America’s consumers bounced back from months of retrenchment to step up their spending by 2.4% — the sharpest increase in seven months and a sign that the economy may be poised to sustain a recovery.

The solid gain suggested that many people were growing more confident about spending, especially after receiving $600 checks that went to most adults early this year in a federal economic aid package. Additional relief is likely for American households and businesses as Congress considers Biden’s new aid package.

At the same time, rising bond yields in the financial markets are pointing to worries that higher inflation could be on the way as the economy recovers. This week, Lael Brainard, a member of the Fed’s Board of Governors, sought to calm investors by stressing that the Fed, while generally optimistic in its outlook, is still a long way off from raising interest rates or otherwise lessening its support for the economy.