peter morici, the economy is not giving them everything that they could be working with.pite these numbers, you know, a drop in the jobs rate in particular, you say that it fuels concerns recovery is sputtering and a recession is imminent. why? >> well, for one thing, manufacturing has lost jobs for a couple of months in a row and that was one of the bright stars of the recovery. a number is the unemployment rate is down because we have about 750,000 additional home-based businesses essentially, people who say they are self-employed. in an economy that's growing so slowly it's implausible that they are finding full-time work, but rather they are working a few hours a week and they are being counted in the house hold survey. after all, they are about 4% of the labor force by themselves. it's hard to imagine that 4% of the labor force all of a sudden finds a viable home-based business in an economy that's growing at less than 1.5%. >> short timers, got people working part-time, people who are -- are home-based businesses, people doing contract work. dan, i mean, it sounds t

go to >> we e back k for more with peter morici and doug fruehling. gentlemen, welcome back. i want to tatalk to you about this list that everyone wait for. the 50 fastest-growing cocompanies. let's take a look at theist. 403% grorowth. they areased in arlgton. >> the three guys there were in here yesterday, three years ago they got together and started their own company. now they have 32 employees. >> we will get to number four, but lelet's do it number two.. asset management. 237% growth.h. one of the things poininted to in the profile is a big conact. it was years in the making. they took time to develop relationships and that led to ernight success. >>they have built these companies on relationships which is making these companies grow right now. >> number three is in arlington. they are in coulting. that i 154% growth in leesburg. 867 employees in leesburg dng government services. >> all four companies have done the govement work and are all based in virginia. >> onone of the things to always recognize a good deal of governme work has be outsourced. it is less expensive

in last business activity for more joining me now maryland economist, peter morici. welcome back, you had a number i saw nowhere else in estimates total costs, of this storm, you said 35 to 45 billion-dollars, how do you get there? >> we will have about 20 million in property loss. initial estimates are 5 to 10, for irene they were 7, but irene was closer to 20, i think they will be as bad. but now, look at all stores that are closed, flights that have not gone out, hotels and businesses onshore and new york city that are down for 4 days, that is a loss of income. that is 20 billion that gets me to 40. gerri: wow, okay that makes sense. people underestimate the costs. i read new york city alone is an economy with $4 billion that pumps out $ 4 billion every day, times 5 is $20 billion, not just damage you repair. it is also the loss of productivity, workdays, loss payroll, it could be far more devastating than we've been talking babout, you also said, in short term painful but longer term we get a bunch of federal dollars that will pump energy into the economy. >> abs

here with me is economist peter morici. which also have gary burtless, senior fellow? [no audio. what do you think. what a difference between the two surveys. peter, start with you. >> the bls is not cooking the numbers. i believe that. they don't do such a thing. there a anomalies. household survey counts self-employed people. a lot of people established home based business. they have been dissipating savings. that doesn't mean they're fully employed. to have 800,000 jobs created that would be 6% gain in employment in one month. that would be 135% rate per year, or some big number like that. that's crazy. on a compounded basis in economy growing only 1 1/2% a year. that's just silly. my feeling it is a lot of folks, home based businesses. pick up a little more here and there but they're not really fully employed. melissa: gary, do you think that what is going on? >> no, look the household survey produces volatile numbers on employment. that's all there is to it. the last [no audio] period since january, the numbers from two surveys are much more similar. there is rise in employme

with me is economist peter morici. so happy to have you here. i'm baffled. i don't know, can you -- >> i'm more than baffled. barack obama got one a couple years ago for doing nothing but his promise. riots in greece. people are eating out of garbage appeals and dumpsters in spain all because of austerity being imposed on them by the north and the european union get as peace prize for that? maybe they ought to roll tanks through athens and maybe they give them two of them. melissa: i don't know. these pictures we're looking at right now do not scream peace to me. you know, the chairman of the panel was a little testy at the press conference when people asked him questions like this. they sort of challenged him. he said that they have ayed a stablizing part in the continent, bringing together all of the european union. does it look stable to you? i feel like it is not terribly stable especially when we look at their finances. >> no, it is not terribly stable. in the begin the european union was a great idea. it did reduce emanity after the war and made anothe

my favorite economist peter morici is here to commiserate with me over this one. this report is staggering. i like it though i have to say when somebody goes out and quantify the impact of these things because i don't want emotion. i want to focus in on the numbers. so let's do that. $200 billion out of the prate sector if the bush tax cuts go away. 100 billion of government spending that would stop under the sequestration. do those numbers sound about right to you and is there a multiplier at work here? does it matter more if you take money away from the consumer in forms of evaporating tax cuts or the government spending? >> well i don't know that it matters more over the period of a couple of years but the immediate effect is that the tax increases will take effect. and people have to pay the tass and spending will go down. i don't know that sequestration will click in as quickly as people say. there will be a reduction in ending over the course of the year but i don't know that it will happen as qukly. there is a real danger the tax increase could throw us rig

peter morici braced the elements to get to a studio to talk about this thanks for coming in. we appreciate your inside sight. you're estimate is bigger than the impact we just quoted. i think it could be 45 billion. how come? >> essentially irene cost us about 20 billion in terms of destruction and so that's a good starting point for this storm. then you have the lost commerce. new york city, the stock exchange, washington, philadelphia, boston, are all closed for several is days. you pretty much double that because of the lost commerce. so we start out in a hole of about 40 to $50 billion. the question is, how much do we get back from the rebuilding process? we're going to rebuild more than we lost. we always do that. a lot of this is prime property and could benefit from, you know, bigger buildings, better buildings and so forth. and some of the lost commerce, people that didn't go to brooks brothers today to buy a fall suit will go next week. so not all of it will be lost but there will be additional spending on construction and so forth. we have a lot of unemployment in t

peter morici is an economist at the university of maryland, he's our guest along with charlie gasparinosenior correspondent at the fox business network. we want the economist perspective, but we also want charlie's great reporting from the private sector as well. peter, what do you think about this? are we skidding into a recession? is it a double dip? what's your assessment? >> there is a grave danger of recession, there's the problem of business pessimism because of the policies that mr. obama is going to double down on. the tax increases and so forth. conditions in europe are notprot dealing with the fundamental -- they're not dealing with the fundamental structural problems, the fact that the southern countries had to borrow to finance importing, germany will have to have a trade deficit, or there's no going home again. in china they cannot grow forever on the basis of exporting to the americans and not buying from the americans, because then they smother their customers. these imbalances haven't been fixed so, yes, the danger is real, and it's grave. jenna: charlie, let's talk abou