memmel,
The point is there was not a LOSS OF 660,000 jobs in March the figure is actually 160,000; The 660,000 number refers to increased numbers seeking work. BIG difference.

Neil understood things are not quite as bad as people think they are.
I've actually argued the same point myself. I'm not at odds with you just trying to put it in perspective.

Simply going back to a 1970's economy alone will cost thousands of jobs and trillions in lost equity.

Its the differences that matter in money not the absolute value. Going from 65% -> 60% is the same as going from 60% -> 55%.

And the headline number i.e the total losses are important when you dealing with illiquid long lasting fixed assets like houses. If you have community of 100 people and 90 houses if ten people leave no big deal but if you have 90 houses and 90 people and 10 people leave then the value of the remaining houses drops 90%.

The problem at the moment is leverage everyone bet on the 100:90 ratio and its now 80:90. Your right we are not even close to real pain that years out but leverage is just as deadly over the short term.