1
   

The US Economy

 
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Thu 26 Feb, 2004 10:21 am
Just released by Reuters: "Separately, the Labor Department (news - web sites) said first-time claims for state unemployment benefits rose 6,000 last week to 350,000, in line with market expectations.


A four-week moving average of initial claims, which irons out weekly fluctuations, rose for a fourth straight week to 354,750, its highest level since late December."
0 Replies
 
Brand X
 
  1  
Reply Thu 26 Feb, 2004 11:36 am
And still 138.5 million in America have a job, most ever in our history.
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Thu 26 Feb, 2004 12:04 pm
Brand X, I would recommend that you look at the population growth of the US.
0 Replies
 
Brand X
 
  1  
Reply Thu 26 Feb, 2004 12:06 pm
I know, it's a flood.
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Thu 26 Feb, 2004 12:07 pm
Actually, you need to look at not only population growth, but those entering the job market (high school students and college grads are having more difficulty finding jobs), and those losing their jobs (averaging about 77,000 every month) vs those employed.
0 Replies
 
Brand X
 
  1  
Reply Thu 26 Feb, 2004 12:11 pm
That is from one survey, the Household Survey shows increases because it takes into account self employment type jobs which the Bureau of Labor Stats does not.

Now, there are disagreements on the accuracy of all the surveys and I'm not going to be able to prove either ones results.
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Thu 26 Feb, 2004 12:55 pm
Neither can I. I'm going mostly from what I read and anecdotal tell-tale signs impacting our local community. Santa Clara County must discharge about 1,500 more employees from their payroll within the next several months to make up a $200 million shortfall. Tax revenue is down; it's been going downhill for the past three years. More middle-class families are requesting food from food banks. The homeless population in our county is increasing, and more single parent mothers with children are requesting shelter. More people are going without health insurance, and that number is increasing every day. We have closed several schools in our area during the past year. If the economy is improving for more Americns, I'm not privy to the "Household Surveys" that tells me different.
0 Replies
 
Scrat
 
  1  
Reply Thu 26 Feb, 2004 12:59 pm
cicerone imposter wrote:
Neither can I. I'm going mostly from what I read and anecdotal tell-tale signs impacting our local community.

FWIW, I try hard not to allow what is going on in my local community to weigh in on this. That's a bit like looking at my local weather patterns and assuming that I've learned something about global warming.
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Thu 26 Feb, 2004 01:08 pm
Scrat, Your analogy of local weather patterns with the economy is not logical. Whether you know this or not, the California economy is the fifth largest in the world, and what happens locally is a microcosm not only the US, but the whole world. If you know anything about meteorology, local weather patterns are most often predicated on weather patterns beyond our borders, but is somewhat limited as to it's long-term impact.
0 Replies
 
Brand X
 
  1  
Reply Thu 26 Feb, 2004 01:11 pm
Yeah, the local economic picture that ci paints is nothing like my local econ. It seems to be moving along nicely around here.

Two of my friends, both business owners, one in signs and one in asphalt paving, both had record years in 2003 and are still going strong.

A new industrail park just opened and two companies are to begin construction of their facilities there this year.

No schools are closing, in fact three new ones are under construction among hundred's of houses.
0 Replies
 
Scrat
 
  1  
Reply Thu 26 Feb, 2004 02:53 pm
cicerone imposter wrote:
Scrat, Your analogy of local weather patterns with the economy is not logical.

Actually, it is a perfect analogy. For you to suggest that your "local" economy offers us proof of anything regarding the nation's economy is what is "illogical". Your "local" economy may be experiencing the same trends as the nation's. Your "local" economy may actually be a perfect snapshot of the nation's. BUT only by looking at the nation's economy--the sum and aggregate of thousands of "local" economies, and then comparing that information to your "local" economy can you accurately, "logically" claim to know of any relation between the two.

BTW, it is snowing here. I suspect that means it is snowing there too. :wink:
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Thu 26 Feb, 2004 03:18 pm
Scrat wrote:
BUT only by looking at the nation's economy--the sum and aggregate of thousands of "local" economies, and then comparing that information to your "local" economy can you accurately, "logically" claim to know of any relation between the two.

BTW, it is snowing here. I suspect that means it is snowing there too. :wink:


Thousands? And I thought, the USA just had 50 states :wink:
0 Replies
 
Scrat
 
  1  
Reply Thu 26 Feb, 2004 05:26 pm
Walter - That would be hilarious had I written "state" economies. I did not. I wrote "local" economies. The economy at the coast here in NC is based on tourism. Inland, agriculture is a mainstay. Here in the Triangle, the economy is driven by technology. With a little research, I could easily split the state further and further into pockets of "local" economies. I believe there are easily thousands of these within the US.

But please, keep working on those jokes. Sooner or later, you'll hit on something funny. Cool
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Fri 27 Feb, 2004 02:07 am
Oh, Scrat, I really did neither want to make a joke nor to correct you!

I just thought that c.i. was referring to California as his local economy.
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Fri 27 Feb, 2004 10:48 am
Walter, It seems some people refuse to see the message, and want only to argue. My stating that the economy of California is the fifth largest in the world is the point, and most of that comes from Northern California. To argue that there are communities all over the US that are doing better is moot; we are talking about the global economy. In effect, Scrat's communities' economy does not influence the world's economy when compared to Silicon Valley or California. For that matter, I can find communities in India that are doing better than some communities in the US.
0 Replies
 
Scrat
 
  1  
Reply Fri 27 Feb, 2004 10:56 am
Walter Hinteler wrote:
Oh, Scrat, I really did neither want to make a joke nor to correct you!

I just thought that c.i. was referring to California as his local economy.

He may have been, but I think it's clear that when I wrote of "thousands" of local economies, I was not sharing his viewpoint. Though you do make a point... IF CI meant the CA state economy when he wrote of his "local" economy, then I have to back off a little on my response to him. I think of "local" as being the area I live in; a region defined by a couple of largish cities. The notion that a "local" economy as I use the term tells us anything absolute about the nation's economy is one I can't accept. BUT the notion that CA's economy is meaningful in looking at the economy of the nation... yeah, somewhat, I guess. As CI wrote, CA's economy is certainly large enough that it has to influence the nation's, even if CA's economy is ruled by different things than those of other states.

So CI, if that is what you meant by "local", please ignore my previous comments.
0 Replies
 
Brand X
 
  1  
Reply Fri 27 Feb, 2004 07:05 pm
Quote:
By Adam Entous
LOUISVILLE, Ky. (Reuters) - President Bush told Congress on Thursday he would settle for now for making permanent only those of his tax cuts set to expire next year, after fellow Republicans warned the rest may have to wait until after the November election.

The comments underscore the difficulty the administration faces advancing its election-year agenda at a time of record budget deficits. The White House says Bush remains committed to making all of his tax cuts permanent -- at a cost of around $1 trillion over the next decade -- even if only step by step.

Bush swung into full campaign mode in Kentucky, which has lost thousands of jobs since he became president.

Without mentioning Democratic presidential front-runner John Kerry by name, Bush derided his political rival for opposing the extension of his 2001 and 2003 tax cuts.

"That's code word for 'I'm going to raise your taxes,"' Bush told workers at an expanding pipe-making company.

"We don't need to be raising taxes right now as the economy is beginning to recover. We've got plenty of money in Washington D.C.," Bush said, making no mention of this year's projected half-trillion-dollar budget deficit.

After chatting with workers, Bush raised $1.2 million for his re-election campaign at a $2,000-a-plate luncheon. It was his sixth visit to Kentucky, which he won in 2000.

Two stops in North Carolina were canceled because of snow.

After months on the defensive over Iraq, job growth and his military record, Bush has plunged wholeheartedly this week into the campaign fray, challenging Kerry, a Massachusetts senator, and other Democrats on the economy and national security.

Sen. John Edwards of North Carolina, another Democratic presidential contender, shot back at Bush, saying American families "need more from their president than economic photo-ops and $2,000-a-plate fund-raisers."


Source
0 Replies
 
Portal Star
 
  1  
Reply Fri 27 Feb, 2004 08:07 pm
I think a flat tax rate would be very good for america and its economy.
0 Replies
 
Brand X
 
  1  
Reply Sat 28 Feb, 2004 10:23 am
Quote:
Economy Grows at Healthy 4.1 Percent Rate


Feb 27, 10:07 AM (ET)

By JEANNINE AVERSA

(AP) America's economy, bolstered by brisk business spending, grew at a healthy 4.1 percent annual rate...

WASHINGTON (AP) - America's economy, bolstered by brisk business spending, grew at a healthy 4.1 percent annual rate in the final quarter of 2003. That was even faster than first thought and offered new evidence that the nation's economic recovery was firmly rooted going into the new year.

The latest reading on the gross domestic product - the broadest measure of the economy's health - was slightly better than the 4 percent pace estimated a month ago for the October-to-December quarter, the Commerce Department reported Friday. GDP measures the value of all goods and services produced within the United States.

"The capital spending rebound is in high gear," said economist Ken Mayland, president of ClearView Economics.

Even though the fourth quarter's growth rate marked a slowdown from the red-hot 8.2 percent pace of the third quarter - the best in nearly two decades - it nonetheless represented a solid performance.

The 4.1 percent pace was better than economists were predicting. They were forecasting growth rate of around 3.8 percent.

On Wall Street, the report helped to lift stocks. The Dow Jones industrials gained 34 points and the Nasdaq was up 4 points in morning trading.

Looking ahead, the economic picture seems promising, analysts say. Economic growth in the current January-to-March quarter is expected to clock in at a rate of around 4.5 percent or higher, according to some analysts' projections.

For out of work Americans, though, these are still frustrating times even as the economy is in recovery mode. Job growth has been painfully slow. The economy has lost 2.2 million jobs since President Bush took office in January 2001, a sore spot as he seeks re-election. Democratic presidential contenders have seized on this to make the argument that his economic policies are not working.

Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan and other economists, however, are hopeful that companies will step up hiring in the coming months.

In an especially encouraging sign that companies are feeling more confident in the staying power of the recovery, they boosted investment in equipment and software in the fourth quarter at a sizable 15.1 percent annual rate. That was stronger than the 10 percent rate first estimated and was a main factor in GDP being revised upward for the fourth quarter.

Another factor: Businesses were more aggressive than previously thought in adding to their stockpiles in the fourth quarter. Business inventory building added 0.92 percentage point to fourth-quarter GDP, even better than the 0.61 percentage-point increase estimated a month ago. That also was a sign that businesses were betting on stronger appetites for their goods.

A sustained turnaround in capital spending by business is a key ingredient for the economic recovery to be lasting. It was deep cuts to such spending that thrust the economy into a recession in 2001. The economy has struggled mightily to get back on firmer footing and finally in the second half of 2003 managed to cast off its lethargy.

The economy's performance in the second half of last year marked the best back-to-back quarterly performance since the first two quarters of 1984.

Economists are heartened that businesses appear to be doing more to keep the economy going. Throughout economic hard times and during most of the recovery consumers have been doing the heavy lifting.

In the fourth quarter, consumers spent modestly and increased their spending at a 2.7 percent annual rate, slightly stronger than the 2.6 percent pace estimated a month ago. Still, that marked a slowdown from the third quarter as consumers spent lavishly - powered by extra cash from a home-mortgage refinancing frenzy and the president's third round of tax cuts.

Analysts predicted the economy would slow in the fourth quarter compared to the third quarter's scorching pace as the stimulative impact of refinancing and the tax cuts faded.

Consumers in fact trimmed spending on big-ticket goods, such as cars, at a 0.1 percent rate in the fourth quarter, the first decline since the second quarter of 2000.

Although economists believe consumers will keep their pocketbooks sufficiently open to help along the economy, they are still keeping a close eye on their behavior. Some economists worry that consumers might turn more cautious given the lackluster job market.


Source
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Mon 1 Mar, 2004 10:14 pm
Today from Reuters. It confirms what I've been saying all along - my contradiction against all these pundits - was correct.
*****************
"The survey stirred hopes the February payrolls report, due on Friday, could show a revival in the languishing labor market, though economists have been wrong too many times to stick their necks out over one number."
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
  1. Forums
  2. » The US Economy
  3. » Page 64
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 12/26/2024 at 10:00:21