109
   

Where is the US economy headed?

 
 
cicerone imposter
 
  0  
Reply Thu 1 Mar, 2012 11:50 pm
@hawkeye10,
Not all of the US is suffering; employment is up in many parts of the US, and the housing market seems to be stabilizing. Those are good signs.

I travel extensively, and find many Americans on vacation in many countries around the world.

We are not wealthy, but our retirement funds have done very well during the first two months of this year. My retirement funds gained over 7%. My wife and I are going on an 18-day national parks tour in May.

We don't have a mortgage, and our cars are paid for. Gas prices doesn't affect us that much, because I drive about 5,000/year.
0 Replies
 
revelette
 
  0  
Reply Fri 2 Mar, 2012 08:30 am
It is just a fact that higher gas prices are going to use up income effecting middle and lower income earners more than higher income earners. Hopefully, the speculators will quit racking up the gas prices. I guess the reason they are racking up the gas prices is because of Iran threatening to cut off Strait of Hormuz. I just wish everybody concerned (Israel/US/Iran) would just calm down.
spendius
 
  1  
Reply Fri 2 Mar, 2012 09:47 am
@revelette,
Have we to get an A2K wishing well revelette? If enough of us wished they would calm down they would do.
revelette
 
  0  
Reply Fri 2 Mar, 2012 09:48 am
@spendius,
Never hurts to wish and pray for a more peaceful world.
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  0  
Reply Mon 5 Mar, 2012 12:03 pm
The House GOP is currently facing a pretty big dilemma, in that they have to propose a budget, but have no agreement on the best way to do so, and the Dems certainly aren't going to help them.

http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2012/03/house-gop-caught-in-a-budget-predicament.php?ref=fpblg

If the House GOP fails to propose or pass a budget, and instead does a CR, will George and others who have constantly demonized the Dems for doing the same thing, comment on it with such vehemence? Will they denounce them for not doing their job? I highly doubt it.

Cycloptichorn
georgeob1
 
  2  
Reply Mon 5 Mar, 2012 12:47 pm
@Cycloptichorn,
The opinion piece you referenced notes the division among House Republicans between those who seek to seriously address our growing deficit and accumulated debt problems with meaningful reductions in both entitlement and discretionary spending programs, and others more concerned about risky moves in an election year. It is interesting to note that this debate doesn't even occur in the Democrat controlled Senate, which hasn't passed a budget in several years or in an Administration led by a President who fecklessly submits highly unrealistic budget proposals which do nothing to address our growing debt problem, year after year.

A very cynical game is being played here in which retaining political power is very clearly the top priority among Democrtats, even in the face of very serious gathering problems for our national solvency. They are trying to maneuver Republicans into making the first moves to address the debt problem and the difficult actions that requires. At the political level this can be rationalized. However, considering the public responsibilities entrusted to them, this is truly contemptible.

Perhaps Cyclo would care to speculate on the President's failure to take any action with respect to the findings of the Simpson Bowles commission (or that of its leaders) on our national debt problem. He established the commission, and spoke boldly, loudly , and as always vaguely about his intent to address the problem. He has done nothing about it, and the budget proposals he has submitted to the Congress indicate he intends to do nothing.

We're stuck with virtually zero interest rates with a government that can't afford more in view of its debt burden and a Federal Reserve that is committted to preserving its ability to borrow, and therefore unable to act to limit the inflation that is steadily growing. (Take a look at the trajectory of the gold price over the last five years.)
cicerone imposter
 
  0  
Reply Mon 5 Mar, 2012 01:48 pm
@georgeob1,
When are we going to see a budget prepared by the GOP?

Any budget presented by any president is revised and changed by congress. This process is the same whether the administration is democratic or republican.

For the republicans to complain that the presidents budget is unrealistic shouldn't hamper their input into the budget process. That's what they are there to do; it's their job.
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  0  
Reply Mon 5 Mar, 2012 02:11 pm
@georgeob1,
Quote:
It is interesting to note that this debate doesn't even occur in the Democrat controlled Senate, which hasn't passed a budget in several years or in an Administration led by a President who fecklessly submits highly unrealistic budget proposals which do nothing to address our growing debt problem, year after year.


The budget the Prez submitted last year - including the tax increases - does more to close the budget deficit over the 10-year window than any plan proposed by any of the GOP candidates (with the exception of Ron Paul), and moreso than the Ryan plan - by a lot. So, yeah. You're full of **** on this one.

Quote:
Perhaps Cyclo would care to speculate on the President's failure to take any action with respect to the findings of the Simpson Bowles commission (or that of its leaders) on our national debt problem. He established the commission, and spoke boldly, loudly , and as always vaguely about his intent to address the problem. He has done nothing about it, and the budget proposals he has submitted to the Congress indicate he intends to do nothing.


The Simpson-Bowles commision produced no budget and no final report. It produced no findings - it failed in its stated mission. You never seem to acknowledge this fact. What more, the Prez' last budget proposed was in fact very close to that which was proposed by the chairs of that commission, after they failed in their task. You never acknowledge this simple fact, because you CANNOT acknowledge it without destroying the very argument you are trying to make.

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
Butrflynet
 
  0  
Reply Mon 5 Mar, 2012 04:29 pm
Moving this over here for comment:

Butrflynet wrote:

Lat week, The Atlantic published a bunch of US Treasury graphs on the economy . Anyone care to comment on the veracity of them? The charts are numbered 1 thru 13 so it should be easier to refer to them by number.

http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2012/02/the-white-houses-economic-case-for-reelection-in-13-charts/253806/#.T1J_RPDMHGo.facebook

http://cdn.theatlantic.com/static/mt/assets/business/assets_c/2012/02/Screen%20Shot%202012-02-29%20at%203.43.54%20PM-thumb-615x449-80028.png

http://cdn.theatlantic.com/static/mt/assets/business/assets_c/2012/02/Screen%20Shot%202012-02-29%20at%203.52.12%20PM-thumb-615x455-80031.png

http://cdn.theatlantic.com/static/mt/assets/business/assets_c/2012/02/Screen%20Shot%202012-02-29%20at%203.52.03%20PM-thumb-615x471-80033.png

http://cdn.theatlantic.com/static/mt/assets/business/assets_c/2012/02/Screen%20Shot%202012-02-29%20at%203.51.54%20PM-thumb-615x466-80035.png

http://cdn.theatlantic.com/static/mt/assets/business/assets_c/2012/02/Screen%20Shot%202012-02-29%20at%203.51.44%20PM-thumb-615x470-80037.png

http://cdn.theatlantic.com/static/mt/assets/business/assets_c/2012/02/Screen%20Shot%202012-02-29%20at%203.51.35%20PM-thumb-615x471-80039.png

http://cdn.theatlantic.com/static/mt/assets/business/assets_c/2012/02/Screen%20Shot%202012-02-29%20at%203.51.27%20PM-thumb-615x450-80041.png

http://cdn.theatlantic.com/static/mt/assets/business/assets_c/2012/02/Screen%20Shot%202012-02-29%20at%203.51.19%20PM-thumb-615x459-80043.png

http://cdn.theatlantic.com/static/mt/assets/business/assets_c/2012/02/Screen%20Shot%202012-02-29%20at%203.51.08%20PM-thumb-615x445-80045.png

http://cdn.theatlantic.com/static/mt/assets/business/assets_c/2012/02/Screen%20Shot%202012-02-29%20at%203.50.59%20PM-thumb-615x459-80047.png

http://cdn.theatlantic.com/static/mt/assets/business/assets_c/2012/02/Screen%20Shot%202012-02-29%20at%203.50.50%20PM-thumb-615x459-80049.png

http://cdn.theatlantic.com/static/mt/assets/business/assets_c/2012/02/Screen%20Shot%202012-02-29%20at%203.50.40%20PM-thumb-615x478-80052.png

http://cdn.theatlantic.com/static/mt/assets/business/assets_c/2012/02/Screen%20Shot%202012-02-29%20at%203.50.29%20PM-thumb-615x441-80054.png
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Mon 5 Mar, 2012 04:53 pm
@Butrflynet,
Actually, graph #1 explains it for all the other graphs. Private sector employment has grown for 23 straight months. Obama's saving of the auto industry helped tremendously in this growth, because all those saved jobs also allowed those workers to spend money that also helped other businesses save and increase jobs - and taxes. It's a pyramid effect that helps our total economy; something the republicans fail to understand. Jobs are not created by more tax cuts; it's increased by private enterprise producing goods and services that are in demand worldwide. That's the reason why GM is now again the biggest producer of autos in the world, and they are making a profit.
It's called "demand."

They also pay taxes that helps all levels of government.
0 Replies
 
revelette
 
  1  
Reply Tue 6 Mar, 2012 01:01 pm
Gas prices break 27-day rise
Quote:

The nationwide average for gasoline prices eased Tuesday, marking the first decline after 27 straight days of increases, according to the motorist group AAA.

The average price of regular unleaded gasoline fell three-tenths of a cent to $3.76 a gallon, AAA said.

The nationwide average was $3.48 a gallon a month ago and $3.72 a week ago. Last year at this time, the average price stood at $3.51 a gallon.
The average price is down 35 cents, or about 8.5%, lower than the record high of $4.11 on July 17, 2008.

Average prices for regular gasoline top $4 a gallon in California, Alaska and Hawaii. At $4.38 a gallon, Hawaii ranks as the nation's high. Prices are within a few cents of the $4 mark in Connecticut, Oregon and New York, according to AAA.

Wyoming has the nation's lowest gas prices, averaging $3.23 a gallon.
Gas prices have been rising on the back of soaring oil prices, which have surged 10% over the past month amid fears that tensions with Iran will lead to an all-out war that causes a disruption in oil supplies.

Signs of an improving economy have also boosted oil prices, as has the stock market. All three major indexes hit multi-year highs in the past week, but have finished in the red for the past two trading days.

As the Republican primaries hit full throttle on Super Tuesday, the candidates have used gas prices to attack their opponents as well as President Obama.

On Sunday's morning talk shows, Newt Gingrich said that that rising gas costs would provide a surge to his candidacy, as he has pledged to get prices down to $2.50 a gallon.

"The price of gasoline is becoming a genuine crisis for many American families," he told CNN's Candy Crowley, saying it would be a "pretty big burden" for Obama come November.

Meanwhile, speaking in Georgia, Mitt Romney refused to promise a lower gas price like his rival.

"I'm not gonna come here and pander to you and say here's what your gasoline price will be if I do all those things," Romney told the Atlanta audience.


Don't worry republicans, maybe Israel will plunge into war with Iran, surely that will be a big enough of a burden for a republican to be elected in 2012 or some other big calamity will occur to knock Obama down.
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Tue 6 Mar, 2012 01:36 pm
@revelette,
Those of us "unlucky" enough to live in California are paying the highest gas prices; most grades are over $4/gallon. Twisted Evil
roger
 
  1  
Reply Tue 6 Mar, 2012 02:11 pm
@cicerone imposter,
Darn funny about those prices. Two days ago, most here were at 3.65. The pumps at Smith's grocery were still at 3.19, and in this area all gas comes from the same refinery, and the same truck. Is Smith's selling at a loss, or is everyone else vacuuming out our pockets?
izzythepush
 
  1  
Reply Tue 6 Mar, 2012 02:28 pm
@roger,
I think a US gallon over here works out at something like $7.40, that's a rough calculation.
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Tue 6 Mar, 2012 02:33 pm
@izzythepush,
Also, isn't also true that the UK's petro prices has been high compared to the US for many decades?
izzythepush
 
  1  
Reply Tue 6 Mar, 2012 02:34 pm
@cicerone imposter,
Oh yes, we've always had much higher rates.
0 Replies
 
spendius
 
  1  
Reply Tue 6 Mar, 2012 02:35 pm
@izzythepush,
The US simply cannot afford that.
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  0  
Reply Tue 6 Mar, 2012 02:37 pm
@roger,
The cost to sell petro differs from location to location (rent/lease, staffing), so their profit margins also differ.
realjohnboy
 
  1  
Reply Tue 6 Mar, 2012 03:28 pm
@cicerone imposter,
I found some numbers about the retail price of a gallon of gas at the pump and the component costs. The numbers for unleaded, unbranded gas come from the state of California as of two dates: (February 29th) and {January 9th}.
Retail price: ($4.29) {$3.71}

Crude oil cost: (3.03) {2.64}
Refining cost and profit: (.56) {.20}
Distribution cost, marketing and profit: (.06) {.23}
State underground storage fee: (.02) {.02}
State and local sales tax: (.08) {.08}
State excise tax: (.36) {.36}
Federal excise tax: (.18) {.18}

I can define the terms. I don't understand the large fluctuation in refining and distribution costs.
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Tue 6 Mar, 2012 03:42 pm
@realjohnboy,
Marketing probably includes speculation cost.

Quote:
Oil at lowest since mid February on growth worries

SAN FRANCISCO (MarketWatch) -- Oil futures declined 1.9% on Tuesday to end at its lowest since mid February, rattled by concerns about the global economy and expectations weekly reports on supplies will show an increase in inventories. Crude for April delivery was off $2.02 to settle at $104.70 a barrel on the New York Mercantile Exchange.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

 
Copyright © 2014 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.14 seconds on 08/28/2014 at 05:04:26