What happened to all of the doom and gloom economic threads?

[JenAltArmy]

The tourist season pretty much comes to an end come Easter. However, my gut is telling me that Orlando doesn’t have the same type of drop off

Meanwhile, in the "Real World™", companies are hiring and filling positions that have been left vacant for months.

I especially liked how the "author" left his accusations open, without a shred of actual proof (much like your cooking the books claims) and just says to "wait and see" till this summer.

I can tell you what I see NOW, and it doesn't match up to the claims of this editorial. Business here in Florida (Tourism is one of the last things to recover from an economic recession, as I have repeatedly pointed out to you and your "not republican" bros) is Fucking BOOMING.

I can understand your cheering for failure though, it's your only hope of maintaining anything resembling relevence with public opinion rapidly turning against the GOP.

 

[unregistered]

 

[JenAltArmy]

real estate is inexpensive!

didn't someone say go west young man, go west?

its time to purchase real estate, as the obama pet project is coming to an end....

oh, that is what we need, a chia pet shaped like obama

Tell me, how is the commercial real estate business doing in Florida?

 

[RightField]

This is the most alarming news I've read in months. I was begining to feel good that the ingenuity of the American people has finally begun to overcome the anti-business attitude and policies of this administration and I come to find out that it's just a lie created by the democrats to help make things look a little better in an attempt to avoid being thrown out on their ears after this election (because it's become clear to a vast majority of Americans that the liberal experiment is a dismal failure that is sinking all of us).

Faux job numbers could lead to real trouble

Last Updated: 12:54 AM, April 12, 2011
Posted: 12:00 AM, April 12, 2011

John Crudele

Deception is a dangerous thing. You never really know when a lie may turn on you.

Take, for instance, the Labor Department's annual springtime boost in the faux jobs market. While it's nice that the government thinks there is an employment boom coming, this won't be a good development if that boom turns out to be imaginary yet still causes the Federal Reserve to prematurely tighten credit conditions.

Let's start from the beginning.

Early this month Labor reported that 216,000 new jobs were created in March. It was better than Wall Street expected.

But the figure included 117,000 jobs that the department thinks, but can't prove, were created by newly formed companies that might not even exist. In fact, the department is getting so optimistic about the labor market that it increased this imaginary job count from just 81,000 in March, 2010.

As I've been telling you for months, the spring always causes the Labor Department to goose its job-creation numbers. And maybe sometime in the future this process will be warranted. But during 2009 and 2010 these springtime assumptions -- which are officially called the Birth/Death Model by Labor -- led to major errors in the annual job count.

The next three months should be doozies. In April 2010, the Labor Department guessed that 188,000 jobs were created by these newly formed, maybe nonexistent companies; last May's total job number was jacked up by a 215,000 guess, and June got an artificial boost of 147,000 jobs.

This year, Labor will likely be inserting even bigger faux job totals for each of those three months.

In other words, you still might not be able to get a job in the real world, but there should be plenty of fake jobs for the newspapers to write about and the politicians to brag about in speeches. Why should you care?

If you are just a regular person reading this column you should be appalled that Washington has trouble getting its numbers right. But wait, there's more.

Interest rates have already been rising because (and I don't need to tell you this) inflation is a problem. Mortgage rates, for instance, have moved three-quarters of a percentage point higher over the past six months. And that's without the Federal Reserve purposely tightening credit conditions.

The next three months' job figures -- if they are as strong as I think they will be -- could give the Fed a compelling reason to, at the very least, end the money-printing operation it calls Quantitative Easing. And it may even have to start talking about raising interest rates.

That won't be good news for either bonds or stocks, the latter of which have been on a truly unbelievable ride upward. Remember the first investment advice you received (probably from your mom or dad): if it's too good to be true, be suspicious.

It's gonna get exciting especially when you see what happens by summer. (But that's for a future column.)

Read more: http://www.nypost.com/p/news/busine..._to_real_3zKnIS84fd4XYOLbEK48GL#ixzz1JL5FhwO8

 

[RightField]

I wonder if we could create a form to submit with our taxes that says:

"This form constitutes an official taxObamaWaiver which entitles to bearer to avoid taxes in this fiscal year".

After all, isn't that what GE got? Do you think the IRS is down wit dat one? I think that you need to make donations to the democrat re-election campaign to get a taxObamaWaiver though. Maybe they'll just put a check box and amount line on next years tax forms.

 

[Luk]

This is the most alarming news I've read in months. I was begining to feel good that the ingenuity of the American people has finally begun to overcome the anti-business attitude and policies of this administration and I come to find out that it's just a lie created by the democrats to help make things look a little better in an attempt to avoid being thrown out on their ears after this election (because it's become clear to a vast majority of Americans that the liberal experiment is a dismal failure that is sinking all of us).

That's because it's mostly full of shit.

Here, read a little.

http://www.bizjournals.com/kansascity/news/2011/04/13/beige-book-consumer-spending-kansas-city.html

http://abcnews.go.com/Business/wireStory?id=13365687

http://www.thirdage.com/news/retail-sales-us-rise-04_4-13-2011

http://www.pe.com/business/local/stories/PE_Biz_D_retail14.1609e70.html

 

[unregistered]

 

[Frisco_Slug_Esq]

APRIL 13, 2011 5:30 P.M.
Tax and Debt Bomb
In effect, the president has moved to the left.

We thought tax reform meant lowering rates and broadening the base by eliminating or cutting back on various deductions, credits, and loopholes. That’s what the Bowles-Simpson commission proposed. That’s what Paul Ryan and David Camp are working on. And that’s the pro-growth model.

But President Obama unveiled a much different tax-reform vision in his much-anticipated debt speech on Wednesday. He would raise tax rates on upper-income earners and small businesses. He also would eliminate deductions and credits, or so called “tax expenditures.” The president referred to these tax-expenditure reductions as “spending cuts.” In his context, they most certainly are not. They are more tax hikes.

Basically, the president is giving successful earners and small-business filers a double tax hike. That’s what it really is.

Of course, the president’s formula of estimating higher revenues to lower the deficit is completely wrong. The reality is that higher tax rates will slow the economy, inhibit new start-up companies, penalize investors, and may very well lose revenues and increase the deficit.

...

In effect, the president has moved to the left. He has embraced the Democrats’ so called progressive caucus in the House by slashing defense and jacking up taxes, all while offering no serious entitlement reform. (Hat tip to Jimmy Pethokoukis for nailing this earlier in the week.)

My final point is this: President Obama’s harsh-rhetoric rejection of the Ryan budget and his new (presidential) campaign to raise taxes on the rich sets up a huge confrontation with House Republicans on the eve of the hugely important debt-limit expiration.

Sometime in mid to late May, the debt ceiling to allow the government to borrow more money is going to run out. The Treasury can move money inside government accounts to forestall a debt breakdown for another couple of months. But the potential for a major political conflict on the eve of this process sets up the worst possible outcome: Failure of the U.S. to pay the interest on its own debt.

This is unnerving to financial markets. Instead of compromise, the president decided to seek confrontation.

Caveat emptor. Investors beware.

Larry Kudlow, NRO

 

[Frisco_Slug_Esq]

Is it okay now to say I hope he fails?

Now he thinks he was wrong to oppose debt ceiling increases.

Now he thinks he was wrong to extend the Bush Tax cuts which at the time he said would hurt the fragile recovery.

Gas prices continue to creep upward and he continues to hate oil.

Are we now in a robust economy or does he think only in terms of his political fortune and not our economic condition?

 

[unregistered]

 

[Frisco_Slug_Esq]

House Prices in Free Fall

The latest house price data (the S&P Case-Shiller index) shows a clear downward trend for the most recent six months, as shown in the graph below:

http://www.americanthinker.com/2011/04/house_prices_in_free_fall.html

The next graph shows how this year's data fits in with the long-term trend. It is clear that the house price bubble, which began in 1997 and peaked in 2006, has not yet finished popping:

Same source

The black stars in the above graph highlight 1951 and 1997, the two years when Congress changed how the capital gains tax applies to home sales. The first change produced 46 years of wealth accumulation. The second change produced 9 years of rising house prices and living beyond our means to be followed by about 9 years of belt tightening and economic stagnation.

In 1951, Congress, at the urging of President Truman, instituted the roll-over treatment for taxation of capital gains from home sales, an economically sound treatment of capital gains. As a result, from 1951 through 1997, whenever a homeowner sold his or her primary residence to buy another residence, the capital gains tax was deferred, not forgiven. In technical parlance the gain was rolled-over until the new home was sold. Homeowners would typically build up their equity in one home, sell that home, and then use their savings to make a down payment on a larger home. During that period, there were large changes in interest rates, yet real home prices were quite stable.

In 1997, a foolish Congress, at the urging of a foolish President Bill Clinton, eliminated the capital gain tax on homes sold by most homeowners. This change immediately stimulated the housing price bubble. It told speculators that the capital gain that they would earn would be tax free if they bought a house in the expectation of a rise in its market value and sold it at a higher price. Under the new provision, almost anyone who had lived in a house for 2 years of the past 5 years could sell the house free from capital gains tax. The new policy encouraged people to gamble on real estate. They saw that houses were going up in price year after year. What an easy way to make money!

...

Where We are Going

In June 2006, house prices peaked as supply increased faster than demand and the housing price bubble stopped expanding. Starting early in 2009, the Federal Reserve, Congress, and the Obama Administration spent hundreds of billions of dollars trying to keep house prices from falling. They subsidized first time home buyers, bought mortgage-backed securities, subsidized mortgage buyers, and took other measures. Apparently, these subsidies only slowed the fall in house prices.

If current trends continue, real house prices (house prices after subtracting inflation) will likely lose about a quarter of their real value over the next 4 years. If inflation continues at about 2%, this would produce a four year fall in actual house prices of about 4% per year.

It may soon become clear that the Federal Reserve and the federal government wasted hundreds of billions of dollars simply to delay an inevitable fall in housing prices. Economic historians may compare their policies to the pervasive price subsidies that eventually bankrupted the Soviet government.

What We Need to Learn

You'd think that economists would understand what was happening at the time, but as recently as September 2005, Charles Himmelburg, a senior economist at the New York Federal Reserve, co-authored a NY Fed staff report and an NBER working paper which claimed that there was no housing bubble. (You really have to read this to believe it.)

The truth is that the expected profit from selling an asset only plays a temporary role in the pricing of an asset. In the long-run, the value of any asset is the value that the market places on the expected return that it will provide over its life. As far as stocks and bonds are concerned, the expected return is the expected after-tax dividend or interest. As far as houses are concerned, the return is the rental value of the home after subtracting real estate taxes. (See our book, Trading Away Our Future [Ideal Taxes Assn, 2008].)

When President Clinton proposed exempting capital gains taxes on sales of houses, Gene Sperling was the Director of his National Economic Council. On January 7, President Obama picked him for the same position in his administration.

But the Democrats are not the only ones who seem never to learn from their mistakes. Back in 1997, congressional Republicans thought that lowering capital gains taxes encourages investment. They still think so.

Howard Richman, Raymond Richman, and Jesse Richman

 

[Frisco_Slug_Esq]

Obama HATES business!

...

The blunt instrument in Obama's proposed fiscal year budget unveiled last February -- a budget that he referenced on Wednesday as the blueprint for his deficit plan -- is a proposal to tax much of the capital gains of a partnership as ordinary income as well as subject them to hefty payroll taxes for Medicare and Social Security. This would more than triple taxes in many cases from the current top capital gains rate of 15 percent to the top personal income tax rate of 35 percent. Or actually 39.6 percent, since Obama would let the Bush tax rates expire too.

The contrast in Obama's approaches to spending and taxes could not be clearer. Obama insisted Wednesday that he would not pursue spending cuts that "sacrifice the core investments we need to grow and create jobs." Whether the spending he wants to preserve actually does "grow or create jobs" -- and most of it does not -- is one thing.

But Obama shows no such care or precision when it comes to making sure his tax policies do not "sacrifice the core investments" of the private sector. The carried interest tax is a direct attack on the structure of partnerships that are used by innovative businesses -- from small firms to venture capital and "angel investor" groups -- that take risks and make an outsized contribution to economic growth and job creation.

...

Ironically, by stifling venture capital and innovative partnerships, Obama's carried interest tax hike would also be cutting the lifeline of some of the very types of businesses he champions, such as "green energy." Folks peddling windmills and biofuels are getting tons of funding from venture capital and angel investors, as well as arguably more deserving entrepreneurs.

In short, Obama's tax hikes on innovation and entrepreneurship are a recipe for, to borrow his phrasing, losing the future.

John Berlau
http://spectator.org/archives/2011/04/14/the-obama-tax-hike-machete

 

[Sean Renaud]

There was a time there when I would staple a tea bag to my tax return. In retrospect, I wonder if I was channeling that old tea party spirit.

No. There was a time when you didn't understand history. It's okay it's not like anybody in the Tea Party realizes they have somewhere between nothing and only the negative parts in common with the Boston Tea Party. Glad you grew up.

Is it okay now to say I hope he fails?

Now he thinks he was wrong to oppose debt ceiling increases.

Now he thinks he was wrong to extend the Bush Tax cuts which at the time he said would hurt the fragile recovery.

Gas prices continue to creep upward and he continues to hate oil.

Are we now in a robust economy or does he think only in terms of his political fortune and not our economic condition?

Sucks about the debt ceiling. He was right originally. Sucks he got put in a position where his original stance simply won't work.

He was wrong to extend the Bush Tax cuts and he both knew it and damn near screamed it at the time.

Gas prices are about Ghadaffi, you do know that right?

We're in a fragile but growing economy and we aren't ready to take a solid hit.

 

[Luk]

That's because it's mostly full of shit.

Here, read a little.

http://www.bizjournals.com/kansascity/news/2011/04/13/beige-book-consumer-spending-kansas-city.html

http://abcnews.go.com/Business/wireStory?id=13365687

http://www.thirdage.com/news/retail-sales-us-rise-04_4-13-2011

http://www.pe.com/business/local/stories/PE_Biz_D_retail14.1609e70.html

Someone repost these links for cowards that have me on ignore.

 

[koalabear]

Faux job numbers could lead to real trouble

Last Updated: 12:54 AM, April 12, 2011
Posted: 12:00 AM, April 12, 2011

John Crudele

Deception is a dangerous thing. You never really know when a lie may turn on you.

Take, for instance, the Labor Department's annual springtime boost in the faux jobs market. While it's nice that the government thinks there is an employment boom coming, this won't be a good development if that boom turns out to be imaginary yet still causes the Federal Reserve to prematurely tighten credit conditions.

Let's start from the beginning.

Early this month Labor reported that 216,000 new jobs were created in March. It was better than Wall Street expected.

But the figure included 117,000 jobs that the department thinks, but can't prove, were created by newly formed companies that might not even exist. In fact, the department is getting so optimistic about the labor market that it increased this imaginary job count from just 81,000 in March, 2010.

As I've been telling you for months, the spring always causes the Labor Department to goose its job-creation numbers. And maybe sometime in the future this process will be warranted. But during 2009 and 2010 these springtime assumptions -- which are officially called the Birth/Death Model by Labor -- led to major errors in the annual job count.

The next three months should be doozies. In April 2010, the Labor Department guessed that 188,000 jobs were created by these newly formed, maybe nonexistent companies; last May's total job number was jacked up by a 215,000 guess, and June got an artificial boost of 147,000 jobs.

This year, Labor will likely be inserting even bigger faux job totals for each of those three months.

In other words, you still might not be able to get a job in the real world, but there should be plenty of fake jobs for the newspapers to write about and the politicians to brag about in speeches. Why should you care?

If you are just a regular person reading this column you should be appalled that Washington has trouble getting its numbers right. But wait, there's more.

Interest rates have already been rising because (and I don't need to tell you this) inflation is a problem. Mortgage rates, for instance, have moved three-quarters of a percentage point higher over the past six months. And that's without the Federal Reserve purposely tightening credit conditions.

The next three months' job figures -- if they are as strong as I think they will be -- could give the Fed a compelling reason to, at the very least, end the money-printing operation it calls Quantitative Easing. And it may even have to start talking about raising interest rates.

That won't be good news for either bonds or stocks, the latter of which have been on a truly unbelievable ride upward. Remember the first investment advice you received (probably from your mom or dad): if it's too good to be true, be suspicious.

It's gonna get exciting especially when you see what happens by summer. (But that's for a future column.)

Read more: http://www.nypost.com/p/news/busine..._to_real_3zKnIS84fd4XYOLbEK48GL#ixzz1JL5FhwO8

Stocks were lower Thursday after the number of new jobless claims surged more than expected and a widening array of concerns negatively impacted the banking segment.

 

[JenAltArmy]

why are you a coward? how does that make you feel? do you have mother issues? did you have a mother?

Someone repost these links for cowards that have me on ignore.

 

[JenAltArmy]

so are you for raising the debt ceiling? when is enough, well enough?

do you support all of the obama spending?

how is the Bush war's any different than the obama wars?

how can obama bomb one country but leave the rest of Africa in a mess? why not take out a couple other terrorist governments?


I love it now that the left wing nuts are pro war

No. There was a time when you didn't understand history. It's okay it's not like anybody in the Tea Party realizes they have somewhere between nothing and only the negative parts in common with the Boston Tea Party. Glad you grew up.



Sucks about the debt ceiling. He was right originally. Sucks he got put in a position where his original stance simply won't work.

He was wrong to extend the Bush Tax cuts and he both knew it and damn near screamed it at the time.

Gas prices are about Ghadaffi, you do know that right?

We're in a fragile but growing economy and we aren't ready to take a solid hit.

 

[Sean Renaud]

so are you for raising the debt ceiling? when is enough, well enough?

Sadly yes and in all honesty it's never enough. It sucks but there it is. Bush had an opportunity and I almost want to say a responsibility but hey we're all human and if we've learned nothing else from sports stars it's that having lots of money has nothing to do with your ability to go bankrupt.

do you support all of the obama spending?

Most of it. Not all. I wish he'd slash the military.

how is the Bush war's any different than the obama wars?

Well for starters with the exception (if your an idiot and count it as a war) or Libya Obama didn't start them. His responsibility is getting out without causing a blood bath. Go look at what happened after we left Vietnam. It sucks but we're already there and need to find a way out.

how can obama bomb one country but leave the rest of Africa in a mess? why not take out a couple other terrorist governments?

One country has freedom fighters on the verge of toppling the government and hopefully making sense of the place. Most of Africa doesn't even have a functional government much less someone poised to overthrow it.

What other terrorist governments by the way? Can you point to these other nations where the government was turning tanks and jets loose on civilians?

I love it now that the left wing nuts are pro war

I love it now that the Right Wing Nuts are pacifists. You'd think they'd encourage "good" behavior in their opponents.

 

[JenAltArmy]

so how much more should obama spend on entitlements?

when does one become responsible for his or her own welfare? why is this the responsibility of the government or society?

Sadly yes and in all honesty it's never enough. It sucks but there it is. Bush had an opportunity and I almost want to say a responsibility but hey we're all human and if we've learned nothing else from sports stars it's that having lots of money has nothing to do with your ability to go bankrupt.



Most of it. Not all. I wish he'd slash the military.



Well for starters with the exception (if your an idiot and count it as a war) or Libya Obama didn't start them. His responsibility is getting out without causing a blood bath. Go look at what happened after we left Vietnam. It sucks but we're already there and need to find a way out.



One country has freedom fighters on the verge of toppling the government and hopefully making sense of the place. Most of Africa doesn't even have a functional government much less someone poised to overthrow it.

What other terrorist governments by the way? Can you point to these other nations where the government was turning tanks and jets loose on civilians?






I love it now that the Right Wing Nuts are pacifists. You'd think they'd encourage "good" behavior in their opponents.

 

[Sean Renaud]

so how much more should obama spend on entitlements?

when does one become responsible for his or her own welfare? why is this the responsibility of the government or society?

He shouldn't spend more. We seem to be pretty decent all things said where we are. If anything he needs to spend more inteligently but that's a case for later.

One is responsible for their own welfare pretty much at day one. It the responsibility of society, to the extent that it is, because that's why we have a society in the first place.

 

[unregistered]

 

[unregistered]

 

[JenAltArmy]

when did UD start writing fiction?

UD, if you hurry you can save lives by telling these folks all will be well, you can be a real hero:

Suicide Rates in U.S. Increase as Economy Declines, CDC Researchers Find
By Molly Peterson - Apr 13, 2011 9:01 PM PT


http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-...-u-s-as-economy-declines-cdc-study-finds.html

 

[unregistered]

 

[RightField]

Yep, UD's recovery is underway...right? Oh, and no inflation either, eh?

Jobless Claims Unexpectedly Rise; Inflation Pressure Grows
Published: Thursday, 14 Apr 2011 | 9:43 AM ET


New claims for unemployment benefits unexpectedly rose last week, bouncing back above the key 400,000 level, while core producer prices climbed faster than expected in March, government reports showed on Thursday.

Initial claims for state unemployment benefits rose 27,000 to a seasonally adjusted 412,000, the Labor Department said.

More here:

http://www.cnbc.com/id/42586453

I wonder if they'll "make up" a whole bunch of new jobs this month again so they can show job growth again.