How to tell when you’re a winner and a loser

The Great Recession began in September 2007, the first time the Federal Reserve’s policy of quantitative easing had worked its way into the economy.

By the time the Great Recession ended in December 2009, the Fed had pumped more than $4 trillion into the U.S. economy through its various tools, including quantitative easing, and the stock market was on the verge of an unprecedented bubble.

It seemed that the Fed was on track to keep up its recent success rate of nearly 70 percent of its assets under management during the Great Depression, which lasted from December 1929 to March 1933.

That meant that when the next Great Recession struck, it would be the Fed’s job to keep the economy humming and people working hard.

“I thought the Great Crash of 1929 was over, that it was the end of the world,” says economist Jim O’Neill, who chaired the Fed for 18 years.

But then, in December 2011, the Great Loss of Jobs started, as the number of people in the labor force declined and the unemployment rate surged.

In fact, unemployment has risen twice as much since then, to 8.3 percent, and wages have also fallen.

And that’s just the bad news.

The good news is that most Americans aren’t working anymore.

The Great Loss Of Jobs has wiped out a huge part of the American economy.

The unemployment rate for the age 25-54 group has dropped by more than 2 percentage points since March 2009.

But that hasn’t stopped the Federal Government from imposing austerity measures.

It has cut social spending, reduced government spending, increased taxes, increased spending on the military, and slashed infrastructure spending.

And while the Great Job Loss of Jobless is an undeniable reality, economists and the Federal government have failed to account for the impact of the Great Economic Crisis.

The jobless rate for those aged 15-64 has dropped to 2.7 percent, down from 3.3 percentage points in May 2010.

But it has risen sharply in recent months, to 3.4 percent in June, and then 4.1 percent in August.

For those who are 25 and over, unemployment is still at 10.7%, up from 6.6 percent in December 2010.

The rate for workers between 25 and 64 is 3.6%, down from 4.2 percent.

So the Great Great Loss is happening, but it’s also happening unevenly.

The jobs lost by young workers and the older workers who lost jobs in the Great Collapse are disproportionately white, and for those who aren’t, they are disproportionately black.

The black unemployment rate is higher than the white unemployment rate, and it’s higher than that for Hispanics.

And the black poverty rate is twice as high as that for whites.

The white unemployment is much lower than the black unemployment.

But the black and Hispanic unemployment rates are all higher than for young people.

So it’s not just the unemployed that are getting pushed out of the labor market, it’s the young people who have no job, or who are on temporary contracts.

And this is the result of the failure of the federal government to create a robust job market for those that it has lost.

So when the Great Deal came along, it was supposed to be a solution to a problem.

It promised to create the jobs of the future, and now, after the Great Lost Jobs, it is creating a job market that’s almost entirely white.

That’s the lesson of the great Great Recession, and what we should be thinking about when we look ahead.

A good way to think about this is to think of the recession as a long-term downturn.

The recession has been going on for a while, but the Great Jobs that were promised were never really going to come.

The economic downturn began when the Federal Housing Administration, the agency that had taken on the responsibility for providing housing to low-income people, was hit with a $500 billion loss of federal mortgage-backed securities.

But there was a good reason for that.

The Federal Reserve, like most financial institutions, was required by law to maintain a balance sheet, or a balance of assets and liabilities.

So while the Fed could theoretically keep the value of the bonds it owned at whatever level it wanted to keep them, it had to hold onto those assets to meet its legal obligation to lend money to its customers.

In order to keep its assets in a healthy state, the Federal National Mortgage Association had to sell its mortgage securities in order to meet that legal obligation.

So what the Federal Bankers Association did was to buy back some of its bonds to buy the same amount of mortgage securities it had sold.

But instead of keeping those securities for its customers, the FNBAA bought back some from the Fed, but that didn’t keep its liabilities under control.

So instead of being able to keep a portion of its holdings, the Treasury Department went after the FNMAs bondholders, and as a result, the government defaulted on some of the FNAs loans to the private sector