Disasters are Good for the Economy?!

I was perusing the St. Louis Post-Dispatch from this past Thursday (June 9, 2011). In the middle of the news section I saw an article from AP with this headline:

"Joplin tornado heats up slow housing market".

The gist of the article is that almost all of the homes that were sale before the tornado hit and that are still standing after the tornado have all been sold. Also, the need for new homes has increased drastically.

Really? This counts as news now. Not only that but the underlying message seems to be that disasters are good for the economy. That makes absolutely no sense whatsoever. Not only is it bad journalism, but it's stupid, too.

Private Pay At Historic Lows

In an article from yesterday's USA TODAY, it was reported that, "Paychecks from private business shrank to their smallest share of personal income in U.S. history during the first quarter of this year," while, "At the same time government-provided benefits — from Social Security, unemployment insurance, food stamps and other programs — rose to a record high during the first three months of 2010."

This isn't good news. Yes, we need programs to help people in need, but if the economy is really getting better, as is being reported in most of the traditional media sources, then private pay should be increasing while government provided benefits either remain the same or decrease. The opposite has happened and, as evidence by what's happened in Greece and is on the verge of happening in several other European Community nations, this is one of the final warning signs before a nation jumps over the edge of the cliff. History does repeat itself, will we learn from the mistakes of the past or will we just repeat them, too?