Bad Obama Economy growing Worse!!!

[Pidgey]

Addendum: If possible.

 

[Pidgey]

Possible Swine Flu complication (to the economy this fall):

http://www.yournabe.com/articles/2009/08/13/astoria_times/news/astoria_times_newsmizhiqz08122009.txt

So far, we've seen 302 deaths in 44,000 lab-identified cases*, so the CFR is running ~0.7% amongst known and verified cases. That article posits a CFR increase up to a range between 2.1 and 3.3%. If the CAR hits as high as predictions (~40%), then we'd be looking at a whopper of a bad Fall.



*http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090724/ap_on_he_me/us_med_swine_flu

 

[asur]

A highly influential American has finally hit the panic button about the tremendous mountain of debt the country is piling up.

Last year, Warren Buffett says, we were justified in using any means necessary to stave off another Great Depression. Now that the economy is beginning to recover, however, we need to curtail our out-of-control spending, or we'll destroy the value of the dollar and many Americans' life savings.

Hey Warren, Obama plans on spending increases from here on out.
You ain't seen nothin yet Warren!

By the way Warren, your stocks will also go down the tubes!
You voted for your own demise!

 

[PLC1]

A highly influential American has finally hit the panic button about the tremendous mountain of debt the country is piling up.

Last year, Warren Buffett says, we were justified in using any means necessary to stave off another Great Depression. Now that the economy is beginning to recover, however, we need to curtail our out-of-control spending, or we'll destroy the value of the dollar and many Americans' life savings.

Hey Warren, Obama plans on spending increases from here on out.
You ain't seen nothin yet Warren!

By the way Warren, your stocks will also go down the tubes!
You voted for your own demise!

I'd be willing to bet that the deficit will decrease in the coming couple of years as the economy recovers and revenue increases.

The deficit will, of course, still be there, just as it has been for several years now, but it will actually start to shrink.

Anyone want to take that bet?

Oh, yes, and Buffet is right, as he is on most matters that deal with money. He should be, as he has more experience with money than most of us do.

 

[BigRob]

I'd be willing to bet that the deficit will decrease in the coming couple of years as the economy recovers and revenue increases.

The deficit will, of course, still be there, just as it has been for several years now, but it will actually start to shrink.

Anyone want to take that bet?

Oh, yes, and Buffet is right, as he is on most matters that deal with money. He should be, as he has more experience with money than most of us do.

The deficit will absolutely start to shrink, because we will not be passing things such as TARP and the stimulus every year.

Even if we changed nothing from the huge spending right now, the deficit would decrease as those programs started to be phased out.

 

[PLC1]

The deficit will absolutely start to shrink, because we will not be passing things such as TARP and the stimulus every year.

Even if we changed nothing from the huge spending right now, the deficit would decrease as those programs started to be phased out.

Let's hope so, as the current level of spending is not sustainable. In fact, the level of spending we had before the recession was not sustainable. Sooner or later, the piper will have to be paid.

 

[Pidgey]

You've already only got two choices: 1) Debase the currency to the point where the debt can be paid off in Zimbabwean-type dollars; and, 2) Default.

Either way, none of the other kids in the sandbox are going to want to play with us anymore.

 

[PLC1]

You've already only got two choices: 1) Debase the currency to the point where the debt can be paid off in Zimbabwean-type dollars; and, 2) Default.

Either way, none of the other kids in the sandbox are going to want to play with us anymore.

We've had debts this large before, at least as a percentage of the GDP, and neither debased the currency nor defaulted. Sooner or later we will get to the point where we'll have to do one or the other, but we're not there yet.

 

[asur]

More News from 8/20/2009 proving Porkulous ain't good!


WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The number of U.S. workers filing new claims for jobless benefits unexpectedly rose last week, a government report showed on Thursday, fanning worries of an anemic recovery from the worst recession in 70 years.


Initial claims for state unemployment insurance benefits rose 15,000 to a seasonally adjusted 576,000 in the week ended August 15 from 561,000 the prior week, the Labor Department said. Analysts polled by Reuters had forecast new claims slipping to 550,000 last week from a previously reported 558,000.

That's what I'm talkin about.
There are no jobs now and there is no recovery.

Listen to asur, not the Obama flunkies that lie through their teeth
about a recovery! Obama is smilin about these numbers

 

[Pidgey]

We've had debts this large before, at least as a percentage of the GDP, and neither debased the currency nor defaulted. Sooner or later we will get to the point where we'll have to do one or the other, but we're not there yet.

We haven't debased the currency? Are you sure? Does a dollar buy the equivalent amount that it did in 1960? Inflation, or ongoing debasement, is a way to decrease the accumulated wealth stored in account balances. It also devalues longterm debt, too. For instance, the payments made on the tail end of a 30-year note have usually been a lot easier to earn than the ones made at the beginning of the loan. Cost-of-living raises over the entire period have usually ensured that.

I suppose you could say that whether or not we can pay it off depends more on what the future of our economy actually turns out to be. Since we were gravitating towards a "service economy", we haven't needed to manufacture as much, right? So... what, exactly, is a "service economy"? In the worst case, I do your laundry and you do mine! Doesn't look like that'd really work, does it? Of course not. So... what else could it mean? Financial services? Uhh... kinda' looks like the rest of the world's not currently in the best shape to make much use of that, does it? Iceland put just about all their eggs in one basket as a financial services economy and look where it just got them!

Bottom line... as long as you've got plenty of your own energy and resources (mineral and agriculturual), you're fine--you've got something to trade with the world in return for what you need. Oops... we seem to need more than we have to trade... And, yes, that has definitely changed over these last few decades since our own oil production began to drop after it hit Hubbert's Peak. Remember the energy crisis of the '70s? We'd have languished then if it hadn't been for Kissinger convincing the oil states to trade oil in US dollars.

The most horrible thing that can happen to us is if they eventually decide to start trading oil in Euros or SDRs. Anybody with any real sense understands this. Rumblings toward that direction have been going on for years now... take a quick gander here:

http://www.888webtoday.com/joyce8.html

That was a few months after 9/11. Today, it's China and a few others who are pushing the deal.

Okay... so... what happens if the world dumps the dollar as a reserve currency? Well, I guess you could say that we would then only be able to trade tit-for-tat, which would be a huge drop in our standard of living. Could we ramp up our own internal resource and energy production? In time to stave off disaster? No way. The same people who push the idea that that's too pessimistic of a view also happen to be the people who: 1) Can't run a calculator to save their lives; and, 2) Don't have either a lick of common sense or adequate knowledge of the subject.

Naturally, we aren't completely doomed as a country--we're not all going to be dying tomorrow of starvation. What it really means is that the idea of continued growth and a whole plethora of increasing benefits for the common man as we proceed to a Star Trek utopian society... is rather unlikely. I'm not going to blame that on the current administration, nor am I going to blame that on the last one--I'm going to blame that on simple realities that we cannot control. If it comes true as I've expressed it... who should we blame? And why? Didn't we ALL mostly consume the resources? Didn't we ALL mostly keep having more kids? Didn't we ALL help create a country that was so desirable to live in that other folks from all over wanted to come here and also enjoy it? In spades?

Oh, yeah... there's an awful lot to that entire debate, so much BS floating around, in fact, that nothing of it's an absolute certainty... probably most of which was thought up in order to support the concept that it's always "somebody else's fault". Them.

 

[Pidgey]

There's a complication, of course... what if most or all countries print money at essentially the same rate? China's been doing essentially the same thing:

http://www.forbes.com/part_forbes/2...loom-in-china-economic-stats.html?partner=msn

Supposing they were to start spending the dollar reserves that they have to buy, say... a bunch of stuff from Caterpillar? What's that do to us? Or what if they spend dollars to buy land-use rights for agriculture and mining in other countries? Hmm... well, since they're doing stuff like that... I guess we're going to find out, huh?

 

[Pidgey]

Of course... one physical expression of a net-decline in per capita energy distribution is a worsening ability on the part of John (or Joan) Q. Consumer to pay the mortgage payment. On the one side... there's the lack of a payment to the EVIL bank. On the other, there's some bond or instrument that should be paying a coupon to somebody else... like your retirement fund or insurance company.

Mortgage defaults are continuing to rise:

http://www.mbaa.org/NewsandMedia/PressCenter/70050.htm

I've said it before... I'll say it again: it seems to be a widespread assumption that The Rich are just sitting on vaults stuffed to the gills with money, either real currency or electronic, take your pick. And... that if we confiscated all that accumulated wealth and distributed it to The Oppressed Proletariat, All Would Be Well With The World.

While that's a wonderful altruistic dream (even I would benefit based on that simplemindedness if it would actually work), it's just not, unfortunately... practical. Why, you ask? Because most wealth isn't fungible--it's reinvested in the same d@mn companies that we all work for, hopefully earning interest! Ever heard of "fractional reserve banking"? "Money supply"? "Quantity Theory of Money"?

 

[Pidgey]

Anybody here follow economic news like credit card delinquencies and charge-offs?

http://seekingalpha.com/article/156952-credit-card-delinquency-wave-reaching-tidal-force

 

[top gun]

AUGUST 8, 2009.Hopeful Signs for U.S. Jobs

July Unemployment Rate Slips Unexpectedly to 9.4% as the Pace of Layoffs Slows.

The U.S. unemployment rate dropped in July to deliver the labor market's best performance in a year, and while the decline was slight it was enough to raise hopes that the economy is on the cusp of a recovery.

Nonfarm payrolls fell by 247,000 jobs in July, far fewer than the 443,000 shed in June, the Labor Department said. The jobless rate slipped to 9.4% from 9.5% a month earlier -- the first decline since April 2008.

."I think it sends an encouraging message about where we're headed," said Bruce Kasman, J.P. Morgan Chase & Co. chief economist. "This is an economy that's improving.

A smaller loss of manufacturing jobs, and an increase in both average hourly earnings and the workweek, were other encouraging signs. But the decline in the jobless rate was primarily caused by people dropping out of the labor force, and the rate is likely to rise again.

Still, some employers have moved into growth mode. ChannelAdvisor Corp., a North Carolina-based technology company that helps retailers sell online, is slowly adding employees. After shrinking its work force to 240 workers from 320 before the recession began, it is looking to add 25 by the end of the year.

The Obama administration was upbeat but cautious. "Today we're pointed in the right direction," President Barack Obama said. "As far as I'm concerned, we will not have a true recovery as long as we're losing jobs." White House spokesman Robert Gibbs said the president expects unemployment to reach 10%, a view shared by many economists. The highest rate on record since 1947, is 10.8%, reached at the end of 1982.

The jobs report sent stocks surging Friday. The Dow Jones Industrial Average rose 1.2% to 9370.07, its highest level since November, while 130 stocks on the New York Stock Exchange hit 52-week highs.

In all, the economy has lost 6.7 million jobs since the recession began in December 2007... WHEN GEORGE BUSH WAS PRESIDENT.

I added that last line for the selective memory crowd that somehow forgot who was in charge when this mess all started.

 

[BigRob]

AUGUST 8, 2009.Hopeful Signs for U.S. Jobs

July Unemployment Rate Slips Unexpectedly to 9.4% as the Pace of Layoffs Slows.

The U.S. unemployment rate dropped in July to deliver the labor market's best performance in a year, and while the decline was slight it was enough to raise hopes that the economy is on the cusp of a recovery.

Nonfarm payrolls fell by 247,000 jobs in July, far fewer than the 443,000 shed in June, the Labor Department said. The jobless rate slipped to 9.4% from 9.5% a month earlier -- the first decline since April 2008.

."I think it sends an encouraging message about where we're headed," said Bruce Kasman, J.P. Morgan Chase & Co. chief economist. "This is an economy that's improving.

A smaller loss of manufacturing jobs, and an increase in both average hourly earnings and the workweek, were other encouraging signs. But the decline in the jobless rate was primarily caused by people dropping out of the labor force, and the rate is likely to rise again.

Still, some employers have moved into growth mode. ChannelAdvisor Corp., a North Carolina-based technology company that helps retailers sell online, is slowly adding employees. After shrinking its work force to 240 workers from 320 before the recession began, it is looking to add 25 by the end of the year.

The Obama administration was upbeat but cautious. "Today we're pointed in the right direction," President Barack Obama said. "As far as I'm concerned, we will not have a true recovery as long as we're losing jobs." White House spokesman Robert Gibbs said the president expects unemployment to reach 10%, a view shared by many economists. The highest rate on record since 1947, is 10.8%, reached at the end of 1982.

The jobs report sent stocks surging Friday. The Dow Jones Industrial Average rose 1.2% to 9370.07, its highest level since November, while 130 stocks on the New York Stock Exchange hit 52-week highs.

In all, the economy has lost 6.7 million jobs since the recession began in December 2007... WHEN GEORGE BUSH WAS PRESIDENT.

I added that last line for the selective memory crowd that somehow forgot who was in charge when this mess all started.

Your story is 12 days old. Since that time as well the number of first time filers for unemployment raised unexpectedly. There are positive signs around, but we are not entirely out of the woods.