I forget; who was saying the 4th Q 2009 GDP wouldn't be 4.8%?

[joedirt 0]

Government spending as a percent of GDP is almost half, with no actual productive industry to show for it. Our short term debt is about 4 times as big as our reserves. Foreigners own almost half of our total debt. These things are gonna be a problem.

[philh 0]

Quote

Quote

http://www.bea.gov/newsreleases/national/gdp/gdp_glance.htm

Well you're right, it's 5.7%! Of course that's still an estimate, but even if it falls to 4.8, 4.0, that's great news, right? Oh wait, you guys want Obama and the US to fail; my bad .

Guess you haven't heard the term "double dip recession". Have you not noticed that every positive economic report comes with a caveat about poor underlying data? This crap economy isn't close to over, and we have this anti-American leftist president (lower-cae "p" intentional) to thank for it.

Home sales hit a 17 year low in December. Unemployment is about to top the 11% mark and is well past 20% if you include the unemployed that are no longer on unemployment benefits and have literally given up looking for a job. Commercial REIT's are about to tank, and by the way, your numbers are actually crap once you adjust for inventory rebuilding levels.

Did I mention Ford turned a $2+ billion profit for 2009? Yes, Ford. The only one of Detroit's big 3 that DIDN"T take stimulus money.

Obama. Taking America from the frying pan to the fire, one guilty white man at a time.

I think this is one of the dumbest things I have ever heard in my life. I work in financial markets and I remember all those years ago in 2007 when things started to turn sour and then in 2008 when they went from sour to disaster. As far as my memory serves me, Bush was the President when this occurred. To blame the subsequent mess on Obama is absurd in the extreme.

[kallend 2,098]

Quote

Quote

Quote

http://www.bea.gov/newsreleases/national/gdp/gdp_glance.htm

Well you're right, it's 5.7%! Of course that's still an estimate, but even if it falls to 4.8, 4.0, that's great news, right? Oh wait, you guys want Obama and the US to fail; my bad .

Guess you haven't heard the term "double dip recession". Have you not noticed that every positive economic report comes with a caveat about poor underlying data? This crap economy isn't close to over, and we have this anti-American leftist president (lower-cae "p" intentional) to thank for it.

Home sales hit a 17 year low in December. Unemployment is about to top the 11% mark and is well past 20% if you include the unemployed that are no longer on unemployment benefits and have literally given up looking for a job. Commercial REIT's are about to tank, and by the way, your numbers are actually crap once you adjust for inventory rebuilding levels.

Did I mention Ford turned a $2+ billion profit for 2009? Yes, Ford. The only one of Detroit's big 3 that DIDN"T take stimulus money.

Obama. Taking America from the frying pan to the fire, one guilty white man at a time.

I think this is one of the dumbest things I have ever heard in my life. I work in financial markets and I remember all those years ago in 2007 when things started to turn sour and then in 2008 when they went from sour to disaster. As far as my memory serves me, Bush was the President when this occurred. To blame the subsequent mess on Obama is absurd in the extreme.

Not only was Bush (p)resident when it all started, the GOP was in denial for the better part of a year so it just got worse and worse and worse.

Fascinating to read that old thread and see who wrote what.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

As far as my memory serves me, Bush was the President when this occurred. To blame the subsequent mess on Obama is absurd in the extreme.

Too bad your memory doesn't recall who was running Congress (you know, the people that actually DRAFT those spending bills) in 2007.

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[philh 0]

A quick look at Wikipedia might be helpful, here . Look up United States Federal Budget:
You'll see its proposed by the President.
You'll also see if you look at the cost of the Iraq war that the direct cost is $704bln. But it doesn't stop there. There are many more indirect costs, for example the rising price of oil is a cost to the US economy. According to Nobel prize Winning economist Jospeh Stiglitz the total cost of the war in Iraq when you add up all these indirect costs is $3 trillion.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/columnists/guest_contributors/article3419840.ece

Could you tell what you think would happen to happen to the US economy if $3 trillion was taken from it and then burnt in a hole in the Middle East?

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

A quick look at Wikipedia might be helpful, here . Look up United States Federal Budget:
You'll see its proposed by the President.

Correct. The President makes proposals - Congress then creates the budget. They are NOT constrained to rubber-stamp the President's proposal - you may recall the fight between the Republican 104th Congress and President Clinton over the budget.

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[Lucky... 0]

Quote

Quote

As far as my memory serves me, Bush was the President when this occurred. To blame the subsequent mess on Obama is absurd in the extreme.

Too bad your memory doesn't recall who was running Congress (you know, the people that actually DRAFT those spending bills) in 2007.

Well, let's see, it was the Dems who had control of the House by a small margin and the senate was tied with the R's having tie-breaker control.

[Lucky... 0]

Quote

Quote

A quick look at Wikipedia might be helpful, here . Look up United States Federal Budget:
You'll see its proposed by the President.

Correct. The President makes proposals - Congress then creates the budget. They are NOT constrained to rubber-stamp the President's proposal - you may recall the fight between the Republican 104th Congress and President Clinton over the budget.

Right, and who won that one? Oh yea, mostly the pres got what he wanted. So your point is that the president usually gets what he wants. In the case of your favorite president, he did get what he wanted all the way around:

- Iraq/AFG war
- Overtime Law
- Medicare Prescription Drug, Improvement, and Modernization Act

On and on and on. Hoover's economy was caustic, as he did nothing substantive as compared with the mess at hand. But that was singular in that the entire problem revolved around the sick economy, banks, etc. GWB's was caustic from all angles in that GWB fucked the nation in many diverse ways.

[Lucky... 0]

Quote

The 4th Q GDP isn't 4.8%. Or even 5.7%.

You're right, it's 5.9%; my bad.

[Lucky... 0]

Quote

Do you still think the 4th Q 2009 GDP was 5.7% (or somewhere in the vicinity)?

Yes

[Lucky... 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Do you still think the 4th Q 2009 GDP was 5.7% (or somewhere in the vicinity)?

As I tried to bet Mike (Mneal), it will be within 20% of 4.8% either way. I still feel that way.

You are so far off the mark you don't even know why your wrong. 4.8% isn't within 1000% either way. No shit.

No shit?

[Lucky... 0]

Quote

As I tried to bet Mike (Mneal), it will be within 20% of 4.8% either way. I still feel that way.

Hey Mike, you're right, I woulda lost, BUT ON THE HIGH END

4.8 X 1.2 = 5.76% not 5.9%; I woulda lost ....

[hwt 0]

Quote

Quote

Sluggish Growth for 2010 is expected...Blue Skies!

And then the prediction is it will get MUCH worse in 2011. This is very dependent however on whether congress decides to increase or decrease punishment on large and small business AND whether the current level of fed spending is maintained or increased

You guys have been wrong all year, esp Stanley with his market predictions, now that the GDP is smoking hot and unemp stabilized, you guys are focusing in 2011. Great for laughs. I guess if your current predictions or past predictions of today tank, you have to make new predictions for future years.
_________________________________________________
Hey Lucky it looks like your wrong again.GDP has been dropping and unemployment has been rising.

[timmyfitz 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Sluggish Growth for 2010 is expected...Blue Skies!

And then the prediction is it will get MUCH worse in 2011. This is very dependent however on whether congress decides to increase or decrease punishment on large and small business AND whether the current level of fed spending is maintained or increased

You guys have been wrong all year, esp Stanley with his market predictions, now that the GDP is smoking hot and unemp stabilized, you guys are focusing in 2011. Great for laughs. I guess if your current predictions or past predictions of today tank, you have to make new predictions for future years.

_________________________________________________
Hey Lucky it looks like your wrong again.GDP has been dropping and unemployment has been rising.

He is not wrong, he was just misquoted. Trust me, it's real and legit.




______________________________________________________________________________________________________
1981 to 1988 is 7 years-Kallend (oops, it's actually 8 years Kallend)

The decade of the 80's was from 1980 to 1989. 10 years. If you remove 1980 and 1989 you have 1981 to 1988. 8 years.

[hwt 0]

Quote

http://www.bea.gov/newsreleases/national/gdp/gdp_glance.htm

Well you're right, it's 5.7%! Of course that's still an estimate, but even if it falls to 4.8, 4.0, that's great news, right? Oh wait, you guys want Obama and the US to fail; my bad .

________________________________________________
We do not want Obama to fail but when you consider the way he spent the stimulus money, We just expect it.

[riddler 0]

It's a difficult position in the economy right now. Every number, except jobs, is perking up. Even the auto industry is starting to make a comeback:

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/14/business/14auto.html?_r=2&hp

All of the nay-saying seems to focus on jobs and fear. And it's fear that's keeping employers from hiring. Fear, fear, and more fear. If my friend Brian Germain is watching this thread, I can see him having some thoughts on that In fact, he's written a few books on the subject.

On the fear side, we now have the Hindenburg Omen, which is entirely based on an attempt to predict the future based solely on trends:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/markets/7944824/Hindenburg-Omen-foreshadows-imminent-FTSE-crisis-warns-BGCs-David-Buik.html

Political motivations aside, it comes down to what kind of person you are. Are you an economic atheist that believes only in the numbers? If so, you should be optimistic about the economy, because the numbers are looking good. Or are you a Bible-thumper that thinks fear and invisible spirits will drive the economy? If so, then put out the dog and turn out the lights, because we could be headed for the end of western civilization.

Trapped on the surface of a sphere. XKCD

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

Are you an economic atheist that believes only in the numbers? If so, you should be optimistic about the economy, because the numbers are looking good.

The jobless numbers, the deficit numbers, and the 1% growth aren't looking good.

Other indicators, including the number of recruiters contacting me, are looking better. The fact that it's an election year and the Administration is no doubt gaming it a bit for November give short term optimism. Long term is still hard to figure.

[Lucky... 0]

Quote

Quote

Are you an economic atheist that believes only in the numbers? If so, you should be optimistic about the economy, because the numbers are looking good.

Quote

The jobless numbers,

3.4% unemployment leap in teh year preceding Obama and he killed the leap 9 months into his term, since it has fallen .6% and that's bad???? Mnay president, incl the tax cuts my friends boob if elected would be up the teens.

Quote

the deficit numbers,

Oh, the one he inherited and had to continue in order to avoid the Great Depression II?

Quote

and the 1% growth aren't looking good.

Well, when it hits 1%, then make a pointm, until then it's probably teh quickest turn around in US history, GDP-wise. http://www.bea.gov/newsreleases/national/gdp/gdp_glance.htm

Quote

Other indicators, including the number of recruiters contacting me, are looking better. The fact that it's an election year and the Administration is no doubt gaming it a bit for November give short term optimism. Long term is still hard to figure.

Don't forget that if we had the party that sports teh Swastika in power, unmp benefits would have been cut a long time ago and the unemp rate would be 2%+ lower. Obama and friends aren't doing themselves any favors by artificailly keeping the unemp rate higher than the other guys would have.

• Quote

[kallend 2,098]

Quote

Quote

http://www.bea.gov/newsreleases/national/gdp/gdp_glance.htm

Well you're right, it's 5.7%! Of course that's still an estimate, but even if it falls to 4.8, 4.0, that's great news, right? Oh wait, you guys want Obama and the US to fail; my bad .

________________________________________________
We do not want Obama to fail but when you consider the way he spent the stimulus money, We just expect it.

Can't you even get your "in reply to" right? I did not write that.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.