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

[Bad_Doggie]

<< homebuilders sentiment index >>

I know, it's a cute and unlikely name, but here it is: http://www.nahb.org/reference_list.aspx?sectionID=134

Actually it's an indicator at this level of less-bad news rather than good news.

Over here in the UK we are lucky enough to be the recipients of what the right is advocating in the USA - no stimulus, lots of austerity. The result so far is that all our indicators are a lot worse than yours. Where is that private sector stepping into the breach when you need it?

Patrick

I fear you ask to much of them to step outside of their dogma and take a look.

woof!

 

[koalabear]

US December Housing Starts Are Worse Than Expected

WASHINGTON -- U.S. home building retreated in December amid a drop in apartment construction, a sign the housing market's recovery will continue to be rocky.

Home construction last month decreased 4.1% to a seasonally adjusted annual rate of 657,000 from November, the Commerce Department said Thursday.

The results were worse than forecast. Economists surveyed by Dow Jones Newswires expected housing starts would rise by 0.6% to an annual rate of 689,000.

Read more: http://www.foxbusiness.com/news/201...starts-are-worse-than-expected/#ixzz1k3T2aqtB

 

[cheesehead2]

Can,t be. Things are getting better every day. Just listen.The truth shall be heard from our great leader.

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

Oh Happy Days!

A_J, what say you?





i took a page from the wing-nut school and only posted the "good" parts

That it's easy to point out, HEY, the numbers are up and GAS IS CHEAP when you don't have to compare it to anything in a historical aspect.

As the reports say, take housing, for example, the numbers are up, but still nowhere near a healthy market and at this rate of improvement, that won't be for years to come...

Gas prices; we're exporting the stuff, but I filled up yesterday and even here in the midwest where prices are more moderate, it's still $3.25 a gallon which means the price of oil has not really come down much, and again, if the economy is about to heat up, then we know the price of oil is going to go up especially with the known policies of this administration.

On another economic note, Obama just waved his hand and had Sebelius cause our insurance rates to rise by mandating contraception on demand with no co-pays.

But look, you don't have to take my word for the state of things, just ask the Obama Team's former experts:
If you ask me, I think what we're experiencing isn't in fact closer to a "growthless" recovery than to a jobless one. Because GDP started to grow more than a year and a half ago, but with the exception of just a couple of quarters, growth has not been noticeably above its trend rate of about 2-1/2 percent a year. I don't rejoice at the news that we added 216,000 jobs in March. About a hundred thousand of that 216,000 is needed every month just to keep up with the growth in the labor force. At this rate of job growth, it would take most of the decade to replace the eight 8-1/2 million jobs that were lost in the recession.
Christina Romer
Chairwoman of Obama's White House Council of Economic Advisors

Or President Obama:

“Look, I’m at the start of my administration. One nice thing about the situation I find myself in is that I will be held accountable. You know, I’ve got four years. A year from now I think people are going to see that we’re starting to make some progress. But there’s still going to be some pain out there. If I don’t have this done in three years, then there’s going to be a one-term proposition.”
Barack Obama, The Today Show February 1, 2009.

"It's time for us to refocus and make sure that we understand that 'change we can believe in' was never going to be change overnight. Rather it's gonna be a slow, steady progression during which this aircraft carrier that we call United States of America slowly shifts in a direction that promises more opportunity. I’m going to need another term to finish the job.”
Barack Obama, Gotham Bar and Grill in the East Village (where donors forked over $25,800 each) December 1, 2011

You see, I've been looking at this thing throughout the eyes of Economics, not Politics, I'm not the one looking for a short-term "win" which is why I've been pretty spot-on in describing what will happen eventually. Now, as Mises points out, no Economist can say actually when, because Economics is not a branch of the Math Department, but of the Social Sciences, and even if they could, a firm date, just like so many other things, would actually accelerate the even into the present as business took protective action. That's why the stock market rises; it's full of short-term players playing for quick turn-around profits. It's not just the stuff of buy and hold.



I didn't panic when it went up before, I'm not abut to panic now, for our economic course has been laid in and will be played out.

Change you can believe in.

 

[Wat_Tyler]

That redbone dogma ain't ridin' with us.


*spit*


They oughta call that homebuilder sentiment index the Wishin'-n-Hopin' Index.


For some folks, accuracy isn't in their creed . . . as long as they can make a "news" story out of it. "Reliable sources indicate . . . ."


Comanchero logic.

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

<< homebuilders sentiment index >>

I know, it's a cute and unlikely name, but here it is: http://www.nahb.org/reference_list.aspx?sectionID=134

Actually it's an indicator at this level of less-bad news rather than good news.

Over here in the UK we are lucky enough to be the recipients of what the right is advocating in the USA - no stimulus, lots of austerity. The result so far is that all our indicators are a lot worse than yours. Where is that private sector stepping into the breach when you need it?

Patrick

How are England and Germany doing when compared to the €PIIGS?

Better, or worse off?

A sinking cruise ship brings down its lifeboats too...

Good shit this: http://www.nationalreview.com/blogs/print/288778

The Private Sector in England (as it is here), one must surmise, is still sitting out on the sidelines watching inconsistent government in action through the entire marketplace, not just your particular subset of the global economy, terrified to risk Capital. That's one of the things our Fed keeps trying to accomplish with its periodic inflations of the money supply, to gain confidence in the government, the problem being that the business community is positively Austrian while the government is a curious blend of Marxist, Socialist and Keynesian policies.

The want of confidence in the public councils damps every useful undertaking, the success and profit of which may depend on a continuance of existing arrangements. What prudent merchant will hazard his fortunes in any new branch of commerce when he knows not but that his plans may be rendered unlawful before they can be executed? What farmer or manufacturer will lay himself out for the encouragement given to any particular cultivation or establishment, when he can have no assurance that his preparatory labors and advances will not render him a victim to an inconstant government?
Madison, Federalist 62.

 

[Ulaven_Demorte]

Cap'n, even Dizzybooby has been trying to tell you that the economy is improving. That you're not going to be able to use this issue to beat up on the President or his economic policies.

But you're still beating the Gloom and Doom drum with everything you've got. You're consistent at least, wrong.. but consistently so.

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

That redbone dogma ain't ridin' with us.


*spit*


They oughta call that homebuilder sentiment index the Wishin'-n-Hopin' Index.


For some folks, accuracy isn't in their creed . . . as long as they can make a "news" story out of it. "Reliable sources indicate . . . ."


Comanchero logic.

The MSM is going to do whatever it takes to keep their hand-selected President in office and cherry-picking is now as newsworthy as the bedroom antics and families of their political enemies...

Contemporary leftists, on the other hand, view their opponents as people you send off to the Gulag, unworthy of any respect, deserving of any kind of low blow, no matter how foul. So you accuse Goldwater of insanity, slander Justice Thomas as a sexual monster, casually publish plays, books, and films calling for the assassination of President Bush, and assault the first serious Republican female candidate at her weakest point -- her family. And of course, you scream to high heaven if any form of turnabout occurs in your direction, as in the case of the Obama family, which was declared "off limits" early in the presidential campaign, at the same time that Palin's family was being stretched on the media rack.

This style of political loathing has become effectively innate. It has been systemized to such a degree as to become integral. Modern liberalism cannot do without it. An entire structure has been erected on the basis of political hatred, and from that structure a whole new strategy has arisen.
J.R. Dunn

"You know, it’s … we’re ready, you know. Our children, you know, could care less about what we’re doing. We work hard to do that. Fortunately we have help from the media. I have to say this: I’m very grateful for the support and kindness that we’ve gotten. People have respected their privacy and in that way, I think, you know, no matter what people may feel about my husband’s policies or what have you, they care about children and that’s been good to see.“
Michelle Obama



I always tell Malia and Sasha, look, you guys, I don't worry about you. I mean, I worry the way parents worry, but they’re on a path that is going to be successful, even if the country as a whole is not successful.”
President Barack Obama, November 2011

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

Cap'n, even Dizzybooby has been trying to tell you that the economy is improving. That you're not going to be able to use this issue to beat up on the President or his economic policies.

But you're still beating the Gloom and Doom drum with everything you've got. You're consistent at least, wrong.. but consistently so.

EVEN [fill-in-the-blank] is ad hominem by Circumstance.

busybody is playing a political game of Elect the Republican, but here are the traps.

I'm already resigned to another FORE years of Obama's antics and his polity and am simply content to show you the road you're on just as I was back in September of 2009 fresh off of having stood well out of the way of his reelection based upon the idea that this nation needed an Obama to learn some harsh economic lessons just as I am equally convinced now that the Republican Party needs a second dose of Obama before it will pay heed to the 2010 elections and actually get its political house in order to match the economics that it pays lip-service to on the campaign trail and then ignores once ensconced in power.

Under any other circumstance and any other thread, I would be remiss in not pointing this out, citing busybody, to you, would be a sure tell of idiocy, if not outright lunacy, but once having heard something you think you like, you draw him close to your bosom. How touching. How positively over the rainbow...

I might pull a Boehner and shed a tear or two... *sniff* *sniff*

 

[RobDownSouth]

Cap'n, even Dizzybooby has been trying to tell you that the economy is improving. That you're not going to be able to use this issue to beat up on the President or his economic policies.

But you're still beating the Gloom and Doom drum with everything you've got. You're consistent at least, wrong.. but consistently so.

Refusing to acknowledge reality is a core tenet of the glibertarian philosophy. That's why you'll see him reduced to spluttering about the Euro of late. It's not much, but it's all he's got.

 

[Ulaven_Demorte]

EVEN [fill-in-the-blank] is ad hominem by Circumstance.

busybody is playing a political game of Elect the Republican, but here are the traps.

I'm already resigned to another FORE years of Obama's antics and his polity and am simply content to show you the road you're on just as I was back in September of 2009 fresh off of having stood well out of the way of his reelection based upon the idea that this nation needed an Obama to learn some harsh economic lessons just as I am equally convinced now that the Republican Party needs a second dose of Obama before it will pay heed to the 2010 elections and actually get its political house in order to match the economics that it pays lip-service to on the campaign trail and then ignores once ensconced in power.

Under any other circumstance and any other thread, I would be remiss in not pointing this out, citing busybody, to you, would be a sure tell of idiocy, if not outright lunacy, but once having heard something you think you like, you draw him close to your bosom. How touching. How positively over the rainbow...

I might pull a Boehner and shed a tear or two... *sniff* *sniff*

Poor Cap'n.. Ad hominem!! Ad Hominem!
My point in pointing out Dizzybooby's statements is to show that even a stopped clock is right twice a day. You seem to be perpetually slow, and willfully so.

I know, the truth has a decidedly Liberal bias.

 

[patrick1]

The Private Sector in England (as it is here), one must surmise, is still sitting out on the sidelines watching inconsistent government in action through the entire marketplace, not just your particular subset of the global economy, terrified to risk Capital. ...[etc]

I do think this is having it both ways. You place faith in the private sector, but when the private sector sits on its hands, you blame government for private sector inaction. Isn't it time these bold risk-takers stepped up to the plate?

One difficulty here is that public cuts impinge harshly on the private sector: early casualties of the last round of public cuts in Britain (not just England by the way), for instance, were private maintenance firms for social housing, and private owners of care homes that rely on government money. Surely your theory is saying that other private sector folk will be stepping forward in such a case to stimulate the economy? But they aren't, they are as you say sitting out on the sidelines, enjoying their surplus cash.

Patrick

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

Poor Cap'n.. Ad hominem!! Ad Hominem!

I know, the truth has a decidedly Liberal bias.

Go ahead, ignore the actuality of the post and focus on the trivial.


Kind of like the way the economy is being read from the Left.

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

I do think this is having it both ways. You place faith in the private sector, but when the private sector sits on its hands, you blame government for private sector inaction. Isn't it time these bold risk-takers stepped up to the plate? (1)

One difficulty here is that public cuts impinge harshly on the private sector: early casualties of the last round of public cuts in Britain (not just England by the way), for instance, were private maintenance firms for social housing, and private owners of care homes that rely on government money. Surely your theory is saying that other private sector folk will be stepping forward in such a case to stimulate the economy? But they aren't, they are as you say sitting out on the sidelines, enjoying their surplus cash. (2)

Patrick

1. No. Why should they risk everything on an unsure bet? That is how the market actually works; bottom up. If they are successful, they may be plundered and vilified for their success (witness OWS) while in the mean time, they look in askance at government selecting major contributors in politically favored economic sectors being awarded the proceeds of plunder in risky and all too often failing ventures. It is not good to be a venture Capitalist when Crony Capitalism is the rule of the day.

2. No it is not. Unless you are a Socialistic state shuffling around the dwindling proceeds from the looted, then you are freeing up Capital for the free market, but it is not ever going to be an immediate boom, for Capital is investment, factory-building, and machinery investment (setup and training). Your problem, and as an outsider, I can only take a stab at this, but I can see who your largest employer is, that your austerity measures simply are not all that draconian seeing the size of the social state as it relates to the inherent inefficiencies of National Health Care. I maintenance people are not stepping up from the private sector, then there is probably no opportunity for profit in the venture. That's one of the better arguments against government as landlord.

Every day we are visited with the reality of the collapse of several states in your region which would trigger many banking collapses (in the US too, our Federal polity has been to put our eggs into that basket too in order to not admit the failures of our own Socialistic policies) and instability in the markets and world economies and yet somehow you think, maybe as an act of patriotism, I don't know your personal motivations, but it seems that you are saying that somehow anyone with any surplus cash should start placing risky bets and risk everything for the sake of others. Maybe the government should pick who they should give it to...

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

The Dow is approaching the 13k mark. But we still miss the good old days when you gloated about 8k. Then 9k. Then 10k. Then 11k....

Somehow for you the fact that the market went from 6800 to 12,800 proves that Obama hates Wall Street and made the economy fail though. Your point of view is pure comedy gold. Thanks for being here man.

The DOW has been here before, or do you forget why that schtick was so funny?

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

January 21, 2012
Krugman's Premature Victory Lap
By Jon N. Hall

Inflation is the cruelest tax, and it doesn't come just in April. What money the government is kind enough to allow the taxpayer to keep, inflation can destroy. Government creates inflation when the Federal Reserve creates money.

That last statement, however, is subject to debate, as different schools of economics disagree over monetary inflation and price inflation. Kevin Williamson asserts: "Inflation happens when the money supply is increased, regardless of whether it shows up in the Consumer Price Index. CPI jumps are not inflation, they are a reaction to inflation." But for some economists, inflation happens when prices rise. Paul Krugman is one such economist.

In a recent Times column, "G.O.P. Monetary Madness," Mr. Krugman observed that the Fed's tripling of the monetary base since the advent of the financial crisis in 2008 has not resulted in the "devastating inflation" that economists of the Austrian school warned of: "the predicted inflation keeps failing to materialize." (Here's an Austrian definition of inflation.) Krugman sees the failure of price inflation to materialize as a vindication of his sect of economics, Keynesianism, and a as defeat for the Austrians -- up Keynes down von Mises.

Part of Krugman's charm is his certitude; he has complete confidence in himself. But, consider what would happen if the Fed -- perhaps in the name of "social justice" -- created and then doled out a trillion dollars to every American, all 300 million of us. Americans would go on a spending spree the likes of which has never been seen. As folks scrambled to spend their money before it became utterly devoid of value, the demand for goods would go through the roof, and along with demand -- prices.

But Fed head Bernanke wasn't that expansionary; he only created a few trillion, not 300 trillion. I threw up this extreme thought experiment to illustrate that at some point in the creation of money, inflation kicks in. You cannot cover the earth with money and not affect prices.

So why isn't price inflation greater? Part of the reason is that the Fed's new money is not circulating; that is, it's parked in banks and not getting to the people, who might spend it. For months now, the media have talked about how trillions of dollars are sitting on the sidelines. Banks aren't loaning. Businesses aren't retooling. They're all sitting on their money. And they're sitting because of uncertainty; because they fear this government, with its new taxes, new regulations and new mandates.

Another reason that price inflation hasn't ticked up more since the Fed's quantitative easing is because demand is down. Celebrity economists like Krugman have bemoaned the slowdown in demand for years. But if demand were up, there would be an uptick in prices. So, if the American consumer would behave like Krugman wants them to, we would have more price inflation. Price inflation is low because folks are ignoring Krugman.

Krugman has us coming and going: He predicts low price inflation because he knows that in their rational self-interest, Americans will not do as he advised and spend their money. And if the economy continues to founder, it's because Congress didn't do as he advised and spend yet more trillions in stimulus.

In his column, Krugman alleges that presidential candidate Ron Paul is guilty of "ignoring reality, clinging to his ideology [Austrian economics] even as the facts have demonstrated that ideology's wrongness ... his economic doctrine has, in effect, become the official G.O.P. line, despite having been proved utterly wrong by events."

"Proved"? Krugman speaks of his "facts" as though they were the product of a real science. But with economics, science isn't exactly an" exact science." Where was Bernanke when the housing bubble was ballooning up? If economics were a science; The Bernank would have predicted the collapse. Perhaps Krugman defends "helicopter Ben" because they're both from Princeton. Or maybe it's because they both cleave to the same ideology, Keynesianism.

If one wanted to know what Austrian economists think about Krugman's take on inflation, one good place to look is the Ludwig von Mises Institute. In response to Krugman's column, the Institute's Mark Thornton writes:

Third, the impact of monetary inflation on the overall economy takes time. Money that enters an economy moves from one sector to another and eventually throughout most of the economy. Anyone familiar with basic money and banking would know this. Anyone familiar with reading the business sector of the newspaper would know that banks have largely been "sitting on" the Fed's increase in the monetary base and that most of the new money has really not even entered the economy yet.

One of the big differences between the two major factions in America is that conservatives tend to be a lot more cautious than progressives. It often appears that progressives are unconcerned about whether "the system" is upended and America has to start all over again. It's natural to wonder if Krugman takes inflation seriously. We know he doesn't take debt very seriously. Thornton again:

One cannot minimize what he is saying, for it goes to the heart of Krugman's view of economics. In that view, people and their choices are to be manipulated and coerced whenever the government declares it. Now, Krugman seems to believe that only governments can prevent economic disaster. Others, like me, hold that governments generally are the cause of economic disaster, and that certainly holds true in the current crisis.

Krugman's victory lap for Keynesianism is premature. One only has to look at history to know that inflating the money supply can destroy currencies and governments. That the Fed's recent creation of trillions of dollars hasn't yet created painful price inflation is testimony to just how bad the economy is. But wait, the night is young

http://www.americanthinker.com/2012/01/krugmans_premature_victory_lap.html

Of course, I already said that...

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

Refusing to acknowledge reality is a core tenet of the glibertarian philosophy. That's why you'll see him reduced to spluttering about the Euro of late. It's not much, but it's all he's got.

I'm not the only one paying attention to the Global Economy...

Look no further than your leader's list of past excuses for our economy.

Sideshow Barry Barker 2012 Says: "It's NOT the economy, Stupid!" It's the Birthers! The Tea Party! SARAH PALIN!
Bush!
BAD LUCK!!
RACISM!!!
ATMs, KIOSKs & CORPORATE JETS!!!
TSUNAMIS, TORNADOS, & the ARAB SPRING!!!
EARTHQUAKES & HURRICANES!!!!!
EUROPE’s €PIIGS!!!!!!!!
OBSTRUCTION!!!
Americans have grown “Soft!”
MY LIMP STAFF
Greece is the word!
Roman Noodles!
You're all LAZY!
China Syndrome!
Come on WORK WITH ME HERE!
I killed a lot of people people!
http://pajamasmedia.com/tatler/files/2011/04/obama-wide-grin80.jpg
”’Shovel-ready’ was not as shovel-ready as we expected.” (Laughter)





... telephone operators...,


... the Internet...


Bush...

That wasn't me that gave drone technology to Iran!

 

[Ulaven_Demorte]

January 21, 2012
Krugman's Premature Victory Lap
By Jon N. Hall


http://www.americanthinker.com/2012/01/krugmans_premature_victory_lap.html

Of course, I already said that...

We're doomed! DOOMED!

You've been singing this song for over two years, and yet..

 

[Wat_Tyler]

And yet, things are still lame.


Some New Deal.

 

[unregistered]

 

[richard_daily]

EVEN [fill-in-the-blank] is ad hominem by Circumstance.

busybody is playing a political game of Elect the Republican, but here are the traps.

I'm already resigned to another FORE years of Obama's antics and his polity and am simply content to show you the road you're on just as I was back in September of 2009 fresh off of having stood well out of the way of his reelection based upon the idea that this nation needed an Obama to learn some harsh economic lessons just as I am equally convinced now that the Republican Party needs a second dose of Obama before it will pay heed to the 2010 elections and actually get its political house in order to match the economics that it pays lip-service to on the campaign trail and then ignores once ensconced in power.

Under any other circumstance and any other thread, I would be remiss in not pointing this out, citing busybody, to you, would be a sure tell of idiocy, if not outright lunacy, but once having heard something you think you like, you draw him close to your bosom. How touching. How positively over the rainbow...

I might pull a Boehner and shed a tear or two... *sniff* *sniff*

Your were home-schooled, weren't you?

 

[patrick1]

<<different schools of economics disagree over monetary inflation and price inflation. Kevin Williamson asserts: "Inflation happens when the money supply is increased, regardless of whether it shows up in the Consumer Price Index. CPI jumps are not inflation, they are a reaction to inflation." But for some economists, inflation happens when prices rise. Paul Krugman is one such economist.>>

Please explain this. To the best of my knowledge, kevin Williamson is asserting something here that no school of Economics accepts. (He is also being studiously evasive over whether he means the quanity of money supplied or the rate of its circulation, a critical point in assessing the causes of inflation - which is factually speaking measured by sustained change in the CPI)

Patrick

 

[unregistered]

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

<<different schools of economics disagree over monetary inflation and price inflation. Kevin Williamson asserts: "Inflation happens when the money supply is increased, regardless of whether it shows up in the Consumer Price Index. CPI jumps are not inflation, they are a reaction to inflation." But for some economists, inflation happens when prices rise. Paul Krugman is one such economist.>>

Please explain this. To the best of my knowledge, kevin Williamson is asserting something here that no school of Economics accepts. (He is also being studiously evasive over whether he means the quanity of money supplied or the rate of its circulation, a critical point in assessing the causes of inflation - which is factually speaking measured by sustained change in the CPI)

Patrick

No he is not. It is addressed later in the article.

It is also in my prior comments. You can flood an economy with money, top down, but if the risk is not deemed worth the reward, the money will stay parked, bottom up. In our current state, here in the US, if the economy picks up as we see the Obamanomics voters clearly wishing for and seeing on almost a monthly basis now for these long two-plus years, then the necessary impact of extra money in the economy will show up in prices, energy costs will increase, food prices will increase and as our friends above and repeatedly said, unemployment will increase as the uncounted suddenly have hope of employment and their universe of numbers reverses the trend of the last two years.

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

We're doomed! DOOMED!

You've been singing this song for over two years, and yet..

Please tell the truth.

I provided you with doom and gloom articles to lampoon you and keep this thread alive; I could see its potential.

What I actually called for was something akin to what we have.

A lost decade, a repeat of FDR's economy...,

Now, we have a Republican House, cries of foul and obstruction, the inability to enact more economy-saving stimulus spending, with all the blame being focused on the Republicans like a laser while at the same time, we find a curious celebration of economic recovery which leads me to again ask the questioned unanswered by those engaged in personal attacks, is this hope and investment due to the obstruction which is certainly more of a certainty than what the Democrat Congress was providing during it's iron-fisted tenure?