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

[NeverEndingMe]

I watch it, Bloomberg, CNBC, everyday. How will Obama spin the 120,000 jobs the defense industry is going to shed the week before the election due to mandatory budget cuts?

Bush's fault

 

[mercury14]

I watch it, Bloomberg, CNBC, everyday. How will Obama spin the 120,000 jobs the defense industry is going to shed the week before the election due to mandatory budget cuts?

It wont happen.

 

[bra_man69]

Sorry if kingofidiots can c&p so can I
The economic ignorance gap between liberals and conservatives

Jul 05, 2012 12:16 PM EDT

Good old John Edwards was actually right about one thing. He said there were two Americas. Under Obama, the John Edwards' thesis has come true.

The first America is represented by those who work in the government sector (folks who almost always support Obama and vote for Democrats), and who think the private sector is doing just fine.

The second America is represented by private sector entrepreneurs, small business owners, and job creators (who almost always support conservative candidates and causes) who know the terrible truth - the economy is in horrible shape.

The difference between these two Americas is due to economic ignorance.

To save America, we must ignore those in the government sector and start listening to those in the private sector who are living at "ground zero."

They are the experts.

They have the "boots on the ground."

They understand first-hand what Obama's policies have wrought: complete economic collapse.

The dirty little secret rarely discussed or explained by the media and pollsters is the economic ignorance gap between what conservatives think of the economy versus what liberals think.

Don't believe me? Just take a look at the opinion polls.

Democrats think the economy is in recovery with a bright future. Republicans think the economy is in horrible shape, and worsening. How could two groups look at the same economy and see things so differently? Why doesn't the media discuss this disparity? The simple truth is the media doesn't like the answer.

The real truth is that Democrats, who are so eager to support their president, are either delusional, or more likely, ignorant of basic economics. Quite frankly, it's hard to blame them.

Most Democrats I know work for big government, a big union, a big corporation, or the media.

They don't sell anything. They don't own a business, or work on commission. They are paid for just showing up, never based on performance or profits.

They don't know about budgets, profits, or losses. They get a safe paycheck every week, have a pretty much guaranteed job for life, and a pension when they retire.

They are nice people, but don't have a clue about what's really going on, because they don't sell things on Main Street. Nor do they have any of their own money personally at risk. Nor do they notice or care if their employer (the government) bleeds billions of dollars in losses. Their world is their own weekly paycheck.

Liberals, progressives and Democrats simply punch a clock. They get paid week in and week out. It's the same as last year...and 5 years ago...and 10 years ago.

As a matter of fact, they get automatic raises every year if they work for government. As long as they still have their job (which 99% of government employees do), their lives are pretty much untouched by the economic tragedy around us.

The private sector is a completely different story. Most of my friends who are Republican, conservative, or Libertarian either work for themselves or get paid based on commission or performance.

They all know that the USA is in total economic collapse and headed for a Greece-like disaster.

They know because their incomes are down by 20%, 30%, 50% and more. The private sector is devastated. We are all shell-shocked. We've never seen anything like this in our lifetimes.

So there you have it. The "economic ignorance gap" explained.

The people who live in a government world have the same basic income year after year. They know next to nothing about economics, or the risks of using their own money to run a business on a budget (or go broke and lose everything).

In their world, government takes care of you, hands you a check, protects your job for life, and allows you to retire early on a $100,000 pension.

Their economy is just fine.

They are blissfully ignorant and protected from the harsh reality of the real world. Who protects them? Who is their guardian against the realities and harshness of life in the real world? President Obama and Democratic politicians like him. No wonder they will vote for Obama, idolize him, and ignore reality to protect him. Their jobs and incomes depend on his benevolence and bribery.

The same goes for members of the media. New York Times columnist and economist Paul Krugman is Exhibit A. Paul Krugman --like most government employees -- thinks the answer to the bankruptcy of America is more binge spending by government. They give you Nobel Prizes for that?

Like Krugman, the economic knowledge of Obama's supporters comes from books. Unfortunately the books were written by people like Karl Marx.

Then there's the rest of us, struggling in Obama's America. Those of us in the private sector, who risk our own money, run our own businesses, or are paid based on performance are being decimated, watching as our life's work is melting away.

Forget about paying ourselves, we're struggling to keep our doors open.... make payroll... and now, pay for ObamaCare.

It's that bad.

Oh, and did I forget to mention that we are being hounded and harassed by the IRS like never before in history? How can anyone run a business and create jobs in an environment like this?

How about some examples: a Wisconsin flag seller just filed for bankruptcy. In Obama's economy a patriot can't make a living selling America flags.

Next we'll hear that Bible sellers are going out of business too.

The ESPN Zone restaurant chain has gone out of business. -- Under Obama you can't make a living anymore selling cheap food and overpriced beer!

Even Vegas is in trouble. The only casinos making money are those whose revenues are mostly from Macau. Their Vegas operations are dying, but they make so much money in Asia it doesn't matter anymore.

And then there's the NFL -- the richest sport in the world can't fill stadium seats anymore.

Watch any sporting event nowadays and you'll see wide swaths of empty seats. You can't sell anything in Obama's America --not even tickets to popular sports events.

Think these are isolated examples?

Last week's announcement that US manufacturing activity plummeted to the lowest level in 3 years proves this is a slow-motion economic collapse under Obama. Just like in Europe, add together mix a toxic stew of big taxes, big spending, demonization of business owners, too many government rules and regulations, union intimidation, IRS intimidation, billions wasted on green energy, and lawyers trying to sue us all out of business (if the unions, government regulations, and IRS haven't already succeeded) -- and you get an economic disaster.

It's all happening right now, right in front of our eyes. It's pretty simple to connect the dots.

So the "economic ignorance gap" tells it all. Anyone who makes a living by selling something, anything at all, is in deep trouble. Those people see an ever worsening disaster under Obama and they are experiencing it up close and personal. They fear for the survival of their businesses and they are terrified for the future of America.

hese are the people we ought to be listening too. The private sector is in distress. We see and feel this Obama Great Depression deepening.

Democrats who tell pollsters "everything is fine" may be nice people, but they are economically ignorant. Worse yet, their gravy train is based on stealing money from Peter (taxpayers) to pay Paul (themselves). So they aren't just ignorant -- they are biased. They have a rooting interest for an economy based on spending more, so their gravy train continues. No wonder they think things are just fine.

But soon, when government announces there is no money to keep paying for 21 million government employees, or to pay $100,000 guaranteed pensions...their story will change radically.

Don't believe me? Just ask a government employee in Greece what the end feels like. I predict that Obama's supporters will soon get a dose of economic reality.

 

[mercury14]

Sorry if kingofidiots can c&p so can I

You sound really stupid pasting political propaganda while not adding any of your own thoughts. Not to mention editing out the source (a Fox news opinion piece lol).

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

merc, it's been a long time since you offered any thoughts other than hateful criticism.

You avoid any attempt to explain why your political pals are still languishing in stall speed and only occasionally cheer-lead the slightest improvements as proof that some vague philosophy other than general republican philosophy is winning the day.

In short, I hate to use the H-word, but since you seem to be so fond of spotting it in others, your recent posting activities truly border on hypocrisy.

btw,

Another government green project has reached its logical conclusion:

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2012/jul/4/lights-go-dim-on-another-energy-project/

It's like a degenerate gambler or a pajama-clad day trader making big moves with their brother-in-laws loan to pay their back child support...

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

I think this part of the piece is spot on:

"Don't believe me? Just take a look at the opinion polls.

"Democrats think the economy is in recovery with a bright future. Republicans think the economy is in horrible shape, and worsening. How could two groups look at the same economy and see things so differently? Why doesn't the media discuss this disparity? The simple truth is the media doesn't like the answer.

"The real truth is that Democrats, who are so eager to support their president, are either delusional, or more likely, ignorant of basic economics. Quite frankly, it's hard to blame them.

"Most Democrats I know work for big government, a big union, a big corporation, or the media.

"They don't sell anything. They don't own a business, or work on commission. They are paid for just showing up, never based on performance or profits.

"They don't know about budgets, profits, or losses. They get a safe paycheck every week, have a pretty much guaranteed job for life, and a pension when they retire.

"They are nice people, but don't have a clue about what's really going on, because they don't sell things on Main Street. Nor do they have any of their own money personally at risk. Nor do they notice or care if their employer (the government) bleeds billions of dollars in losses. Their world is their own weekly paycheck.

"Liberals, progressives and Democrats simply punch a clock. They get paid week in and week out. It's the same as last year...and 5 years ago...and 10 years ago.

"As a matter of fact, they get automatic raises every year if they work for government. As long as they still have their job (which 99% of government employees do), their lives are pretty much untouched by the economic tragedy around us."


Merc, what is your income based upon again?

Is it the private sector?

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

See, me, I prefer the "U-"word...

A high level of uncertainty as Europe struggles with a debt crisis and as the United States stares at the prospect of a sharp budgetary tightening at the start of next year seem to have led businesses and ordinary Americans to watch their dollars carefully.

While the so-called U.S. fiscal cliff — a combination of expiring tax cuts and automatic government spending cuts — will be hit only in early 2013, if Congress does not act, an increasing economic toll could be exacted in the second half of this year.

"I don't think we are going to get a resolution before the fourth quarter," said Julia Coronado, chief North America economist at BNP Paribas in New York.

"Companies and households won't know what their tax liabilities are going to look like in 2013, what the regulatory or spending backdrop is. It's going to be an uncertainty which weighs on people's ability to make plans."

The latest Reuters survey estimates third-quarter growth at around a 2.3 percent pace, with fourth-quarter GDP at about 2.4 percent. But some economists say these forecasts already appear a bit optimistic.

Who will win? The people and politicians who openly supported the anti-Capitalist OWS movement, or the nominal Republicans who support only some control of government?

Is there room for Tea-Part and Libertarian thought on a healthy, reduced-government diet of economy?

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

Praxeology

Fighting this Depression with the Last Depression's Tactics is a Recipe for Disaster
By Frank Ryan
July 6, 2012

In Chairman Bernanake's doctoral thesis, he "focused on the role of monetary policy in affecting economic activity, and on the historical analysis of the causes of the Great Depression."

His thesis and resulting understanding of the negative impact that uncertainty has on business cycles should provide insight on the actions needed by government to resolve our current economic difficulties. In short, Dr. Bernanake understood that "t is shown that increased uncertainty provides an incentive to defer such investments in order to wait for new information" (page 2 of the dissertation). In the same paper, he wrote, "Uncertainty is seen to retard investment independently of considerations of risk or expected return. Introduction of uncertainty can be associated with slack investment, resolution of uncertainty with an investment boom."

The causes and nature of the first Depression have been studied extensively. It has become increasingly obvious that there were a series of events that collided to bring forth the "Great Depression." Be it fragmented fiscal policy, bank failures, collapsing prices on farm goods, the events of the economic malaise caused by the Versailles Treaty in Germany, the collapse of foreign trade, or the stock market collapse of 1929, it would be difficult to deduce that one single event caused the "Great Depression."

...

Chairman Bernanke understands the role of uncertainty on investment, but I allege that that same uncertainty influences consumer spending as well. Consumers and businesses have been dealing with this recession since 2008. Government has yet to deal with their fiscal irresponsibility. Just as GM was not too big to fail, neither is the federal government.

What is absolutely essential today is that Congress and the president solve the problem -- the problem of uncertainty. It's the uncertainty, stupid!

...

The Federal Reserve is enabling this administration to be fiscally irresponsible with its unrealistically low interest rates. Be it Quantitative Easing 1, Quantitative Easing 2, or Operation Twist and its successor, the implications of a loose monetary policy enables our federal government not to solve the problem.

President Obama, when he took office, should have made dealing with the economy his number-one priority. Instead, he chose to make health care reform his number-one priority because he had complete control of the House and Senate -- a perfect storm.

Meanwhile, the Federal Reserve is merely providing fuel to the fire with cheap money and thereby enabling this administration to delay tackling the tough problems that must be faced.

Whenever long-term interest rates are below 2%, one must be concerned about why a rational person would tie up money for 10 years at rates below the rate of inflation. This economic abnormality may be an indicator that the economy is unsure of whether anything has value. Not spending now is a potential indicator of deflation to come. In a deflationary environment, an investor "makes money" by not spending.

The uncertainty exists in our economy in many forms. Be it the 200+ regulations that have not yet been enacted in the Affordable Care Act or the 200 or so regulations not yet enacted from the Dodd-Frank Bill, the reality is that our citizens and our businesses have no idea what their government is going to do next. We call that uncertainty in my world!

The longer the Federal Reserve continues to allow this government to spend irresponsibly, the longer this recession will continue, until it becomes The World Depression II. There was nothing great about the Great Depression, nor will there be anything great about the second depression.

 

[unregistered]

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

Spanish 10 yr. bond yields are at 7%.

Where will Germany come up with the money?

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

What I like is when Marines think alike...



Col. Frank Ryan, CPA, USMCR (Ret.) served in Iraq and briefly in Afghanistan. He specializes in corporate restructuring and lectures on ethics for the state CPA societies. He has served on numerous boards of publicly traded and non-profit organizations.

 

[unregistered]

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

When will the looting of the free world be over with?

Hoffer would say in calamity or collapse can true change be enacted.

With each passing month, I more clearly see the sheer brilliance of The Ordeal of Change.

If you have not read it, it ranks right up there with Bastiat's The Law.

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

If there was any recent political decision more opaque than Supreme Court Justice John Roberts' tortured-if-fascinating majority decision upholding the Affordable Care Act, it might be German Chancellor Angela Merkel's sign-off Friday on a 120-billion Euro "growth pact" that will effectively insulate Italy and Spain from their own high borrowing costs by injecting money directly into their banks from a new European bailout fund. As Reuters delicately phrased it, "Agreed in Brussels, the details of how this new authority will work, what powers it will have and which banks it will supervise remain murky."

Walter Russell Mead, to name one transatlantic commentator with consistently interesting insights, declared that these two major and obviously flawed acts of crisis management nonetheless represented a clear victory for the United States' constitutional, democratically accountable system over the European Union's undemocratic technocracy. In Europe, Mead wrote, "there are no institutions that are capable of coming to grips with the currency question. Meeting after meeting is held, no real agreement is reached. Neither the EU Parliament nor the Commission nor the heads of government meeting in summits has the power or a method to decide. Europe is trying to write a constitution even as it works desperately to stave off an economic collapse."

Even if Mead is right about superior American institutionalism, the two compromises share an enormous commonality: They both find a way to ratify the status quo in favor of statism, while putting off the hard decisions that are being foisted upon policymakers by the nonpartisan cruelty of welfare-state mathematics. The political representatives (I won't call them "leaders") of what is decreasingly referred to as the "West" are locked in a cycle of pain-avoidance, upping the dosage in the drip rather than addressing the long-diagnosed disease in the host.

For those of us who have spent decades warning that entitlements will eventually crowd out most other forms of government expenditure (eventually necessitating ever-higher taxes and debt loads), events like those of last week are licenses for apocalyptic grumbling about looming fiscal catastrophe. Reminding people that we're just one crude external shock away from a runaway debt spiral helps focus the attention, while indulging the universal taste for drama.

...

So if not a clarifying debtpocalypse, what might the future look like on either side of the Atlantic? I'm guessing much like on either side of the Pacific.

In one corner stands Japan, now contemplating a third consecutive "lost decade." The once unstoppable economic powerhouse has been mired in a mild, post-bubble economic malaise for an entire generation, as successive bank bailouts and stimuli failed to jump-start meaningful growth. It's still a pleasant place to live, particularly if you're old, but every year people's sights just get set a little lower. American President Barack Obama, despite explicitly warning against creating another "lost decade," has nonetheless pursued many of the same policies, and produced an economic track record as bad as any modern president's.

But I think the more likely scenario is the one being played out in California: dreary, internecine battles over a shrinking revenue pie, while potholes deepen, libraries close, population stagnates, and lousy political results of all types—unemployment, deficits, even government itself—receive the apologetic prefix of "structural." The kind of place where the largest municipal bankruptcy in the nation's history is greeted with a lecture by the state's largest newspaper to avoid "finger-pointing."

Sure, California (like Japan, and Europe) will always be a comparatively nice place to live. But as long as the rich world keeps reacting to its predictable calamities with evasion, can-kicking, and ever-creative bouts of muddling through, the best-case scenario will be a slow erosion of the very dynamism that made us rich enough to get away with mistakes. This is not the 21st century we signed up for.

Matt Welch is editor in chief of Reason magazine (Libertarian).

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

"IMF Managing Director Christine Lagarde said the outlook for the global economy has become more troubling as developed and big emerging nations show signs of slowing down."
FauxNews




NO! :home alone: :the scream:

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

Where will Germany come up with the money?

Chancellor Angela Merkel is now under pressure from a third front, this time, from Jens Weidmann, president of the Bundesbank (Germany's Central Bank). The Financial Times reports Weidmann warns Merkel over weakening

Germany’s top central banker has criticised the decisions of last week’s summit to help debt-laden eurozone members, warning that the bloc was “constantly mutualising risks and weakening the agreed rules”.

“Fiscal aid should be the last resort of crisis management,” said Jens Weidmann, president of the Bundesbank. “This position has by now been recognisably weakened.”

In a speech that looks set to increase political pressure on Angela Merkel, the chancellor, Mr Weidmann said strict conditions that had come with emergency aid at the start of the crisis had been “clearly eroded” since then – and possibly again at last week’s European summit.

In remarks apparently meant as a warning shot to Berlin, Mr Weidmann signalled any further steps to loosen aid conditions had to come together with eurozone commitments to pool fiscal decision-making. If mutual liability was to be the only path, then “those taking on liability should get the opportunity to exercise oversight.”

He lamented that the results of last week’s summit allowed for “a broad spectrum of interpretation” – especially over whether the eurozone wanted to stick to Maastricht principles or move towards fiscal integration.

http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com/

 

[unregistered]

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

Private payrolls rise by 84K, terrible number. No doubt this number will be revised downward next week. Unemployment rate stays at 8.2%.

We will have to cook the books in October; erase some more jobs...



I wonder what merc's defense/explanation/excuse will be to protect President Obama's legacy?

U_D?

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

Private payrolls rise by 84K, terrible number. No doubt this number will be revised downward next week. Unemployment rate stays at 8.2%.

Yep. Everyone was swooning yesterday over ADPs numbers, but all ADP does is count the temps hired by Wal-Mart every month. Lotsa churning.

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

Yep. Everyone was swooning yesterday over ADPs numbers, but all ADP does is count the temps hired by Wal-Mart every month. Lotsa churning.

Looks like my Lost Decade was a good call...

Merc wants me to put a date on everything...

How about Nov '06 to Nov '16, assuming President Obama wins his reelection, and on nearly a monthly basis some sort of temp good news is eeked out and blown up to the size of the Eiger and we hear the familiar tune...

Reelected and it feels so good!
Reelected and it's understood...

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

Is CNN Fortune too right-wing and biased?

FORTUNE -- The French government's new budget and agenda could destabilize the nation's already shaky economy, setting the stage for a vicious chain of events that could end up pummeling its weak banks on Wall Street, while shattering the eurozone for good. While some elements of the budget are laudable, there are still too many that risk pushing France into a deeper economic sleep. Hard reforms are needed in the country's bloated bureaucracy and overly generous health and pension schemes if it ever hopes to balance its budget and move forward, but that is much easier said than done.

Nevertheless, France's new government, led by the Socialist Party, has the political capital and connections to get things done in a speedy and positive manner. But as long as party ideology trumps reason, France could eventually find itself in the same boat as its fellow eurozone counterparts, struggling to cope with impossibly high borrowing rates and anemic economic growth.

...

On Monday, an independent audit of the French economy, ordered by the new government, spooked the markets as it showed that France was on course to run a budget deficit equivalent to around 5.2% of its output, up sharply from earlier estimates. The budget gap grew after the new government announced plans to roll back a number unpopular austerity measures passed by the former conservative government. The deficit also expanded as the government finally got real about its economic situation, forcing it to adjust its overoptimistic economic growth forecasts. The government now projects the French economy will grow at 0.3% in 2012, down from the rosier 0.7%. They also lowered their 2013 forecast, projecting a 1.2% growth, down from 1.75%.

The Socialist Party ran on a platform that envisioned lowering France's budget deficit to zero by 2017. To do that, it would need to achieve a budget deficit equivalent of 4.5% of GDP in 2012 and 3% in 2013. Achieving those targets now with the revised data means that the government will need to cut spending or raise revenue in 2012 by an additional 6 billion to 10 billion euros than what they had originally anticipated. The gap is then expected to explode to as much as 33 billion euros in 2013.

To close the chasm in the budget, the government is focusing on the revenue side of the equation by imposing a number of one-time and permanent tax hikes. The new taxes will focus mainly on investors, large businesses and the wealthy. In its revised budget, the government is aiming to raise an additional 7.2 billion euros in taxes for 2012. This massive tax hike comes through a number of sources, including controversial plans to raise the national tax rate for the wealthy French citizens, which according to the French government is anyone pulling over 1 million euros a year, to an astounding 75%.

The government projects its new wealth tax will bring in an additional $2.3 billion to the nation's coffers. That is, of course, assuming that many "wealthy" Frenchman and businesses simply won't flee France to a more friendly tax jurisdiction. The European Union's law of free movement of peoples makes it easy to pack up and establish residency in a neighboring country to avoid higher taxation in their own country. It is unclear how many of Frenchmen will make an effort to avoid the new tax, but the French government was livid last month when David Cameron, the United Kingdom's Prime Minister, said he would, "roll out the red carpet," for French businesses seeking to essentially dodge the tax hike.

http://finance.fortune.cnn.com/2012/07/06/somethings-rotten-in-paris/

 

[mercury14]

Vette and Bra's prediction of a disastrous job report was simply wrong as can be. The report wasn't great but it was the best in three months, miles away from the "disaster" they said we'd have.

AJ - you're a wuss because you don't put a date on your predictions. At least Vette, wrong as he often is, has the fortitude to give specifics.

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

Vette and Bra's prediction of a disastrous job report was simply wrong as can be. The report wasn't great but it was the best in three months, miles away from the "disaster" they said we'd have.

AJ - you're a wuss because you don't put a date on your predictions. At least Vette, wrong as he often is, has the fortitude to give specifics.

I guess you're not following the thread too closely...



Yeah, the report was a fucking bright opus which is why futures are climbing so fucking drastically...

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

What's your date on 7% unemployment?



Wuss?

 

[mercury14]

I guess you're not following the thread too closely...



Yeah, the report was a fucking bright opus which is why futures are climbing so fucking drastically...

Stop putting words in my mouth. I didn't say it was bright. I said it wasn't great but it was better than the past two reports.