1
   

The US Economy

 
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Sat 13 Sep, 2003 10:07 am
Here's another: Today's San Jose Mercury News Business Section has one headline on page 4C "Stocks edge higher despite downbeat retail sales."
0 Replies
 
timberlandko
 
  1  
Reply Sat 13 Sep, 2003 11:01 am
Well, sorry, c.i. ... thought you'd know about the Retail Index. Its a tracking indicator of stock prices, just as the DOW and the S&P, to which I compared it, and is composed of the Stocks of major retailers. What makes it particularly useful as a leading indicator is that Retail Stocks are held most heavily by institutional investors ... major funds, multi-national banks, insurance companies, and the like ... not exactly what you'd call adventurous investors. Over the past year, the past six months in particular, the Retail sector has been subject to net acquisition by the really big players. Having collapsed in the latter part of '99, well ahead of the general market downturn, the sector languished well into last year, then began picking up steam. That it is outperforming other, more broadly based indicators is what is significant, as typically the index's performance closey tracks the overall market some months in advance of overall market movement. Applying MACD, or Moving Average Convergence/Divergence analysis, to the sector, indicates continued growth in the sector is highly likely. It is a reading of where Retail WILL BE, not where it IS. Bollinger analysis and Stochastic analysis of the index leads to the same conclusion, among many other methods. While normally applied to individual stocks, such analysis techniques (based on the pricnciple of standard mean deviation), when applied to entire sectors, is extraordinarilly accurate. The REALLY BIG MONEY, the players who play with real capital, as in $Trillions, sees reason to conclude Retail Stocks will be doing well for quite some time, which is not a condition that would pertain in a tight economy. I won't bore you with the details of Technical Analysis, but I've found it, when applied to both broad and narrow indexes, to be extremely useful in predicting market movement. and far more accurate as an overall indicator than when applied to any individual stock or commodity. The Big Boys use it too, and they also are the major holders of the stocks of the firms involved both in production and distribution of retail goods. Of particular interest, from a different perspective, is that Machine tool Orders are showing the first strength since early '99, and Transports are trending up as well, despite the downward pressure brought on by increased energy prices. While the general market recovery has not been, and is not, "Explosive", that really is a good thing, as that means far less volatillity. The folks who own the factories, warehouses, and shippers, as well as owning the stores, believe the corner has been turned and the near-to-midterm future direction is up. I'm with them. You don't make money in The Market by reacting to where it IS, you make it by being there when it arrives. I've managed to do that consistently for almost 30 years now (well, '81-82 was a little rough, but there was a divorce in there, which screwed things up for a while Rolling Eyes Mr. Green Rolling Eyes ).
0 Replies
 
Scrat
 
  1  
Reply Sat 13 Sep, 2003 11:22 am
Tartarin wrote:
Scrat -- It has nothing to do with politics! It's like my (Republican) financial advisor said, Don't read that stuff: they're just trying to sell you the market. So-o-o--o, you guys go right ahead!

So the head of the EU is trying to "sell" the US stock market? Okay... Confused

Tartarin wrote:
And Scrat, you always dramatize dissent: "irrational hatred of Bush."

Recognizing that some people have an irrational hatred of Bush does not mean I think anyone who disagrees with him does.
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Sat 13 Sep, 2003 11:54 am
timber, I don't go for all those mumbo jumbo "retail index" indicators like the 'big' boys. If I'm not mistaken, they've been predicting an uptick for over 12 months now. That's the reason why almost everybody in the market, on average (S&P 500), lost 30 percent of their value last year. That's the same period when I also didn't have much hope for any recovery in our economy - and still don't. Let's see; the big boys lost 30 percent, and we gained 4.5 percent. hmmmm....... I think I'll stick with my projections on our economy.
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Sat 13 Sep, 2003 11:56 am
BTW, those that lost that 30 percent last year must gain over 40 percent to make up for that loss. I don't see any 40 percent increase in our economy any time soon - and if it did, not by any 40 percent - like your "retail index."
0 Replies
 
timberlandko
 
  1  
Reply Sat 13 Sep, 2003 12:14 pm
I don't see where you're coming from, C.I. ... The major indices have improved significantly over the past 12 months. The folks who've lost money are the ones who've remained behind the curve - a group not populated by "The Big Boys". In the past 52 weeks, The Dow has moved from below $7200 to its current level of nearly $9500 ... a clear 25%+/- increase. The S&P, Russel, and NASDAQ have done even better than the Dow. The facts and history just don't support your argument.

{Edit ... gotta learn to spell Embarrassed )
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Sat 13 Sep, 2003 12:16 pm
Ever hear of "irrational exuberance?"
0 Replies
 
timberlandko
 
  1  
Reply Sat 13 Sep, 2003 12:18 pm
Just the facts, partner, just the facts ... that's what I look at.
0 Replies
 
Lightwizard
 
  1  
Reply Sat 13 Sep, 2003 12:35 pm
The only real index of retail sales is based on sales taxes paid -- that isn't reflecting any huge upsurge of sales. Profit margins are also down with retailers as they discount. I wouldn't trust any one way of gauging retail sales or consumer confidence. That's the trouble with economics -- too much hindsight and not enough foresight.
0 Replies
 
Lightwizard
 
  1  
Reply Sat 13 Sep, 2003 12:36 pm
(And it is one reason why California is in such a financial quandry -- sales tax revenues are way down).
0 Replies
 
Scrat
 
  1  
Reply Sat 13 Sep, 2003 12:38 pm
cicerone imposter wrote:
Here's another: Today's San Jose Mercury News Business Section has one headline on page 4C "Stocks edge higher despite downbeat retail sales."

Hmmm...
Here's what I found at the top of a news search of "economy retail":
Retail sales rise 0.6 percent in August as shoppers ease up after July buying binge
I read your headline, CI, and the choice of the word "downbeat" made me think retail sales were down, when in fact they were up a little.
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Sat 13 Sep, 2003 01:03 pm
Scrat, If you've been keeping up with this forum, you'll see that what may be described as "up" in retail sales doesn't tell us the whole picture. In other words, what made it up? Was the profit margin up also? Were seasonal adjustments considered? As for the July buying binge, consumer debt also increased by five billion dollars. I see a house of cards, you see positive growth.
0 Replies
 
timberlandko
 
  1  
Reply Sat 13 Sep, 2003 01:14 pm
Quote:
Retail sales rise 0.6 percent in August as shoppers ease up after July buying binge
JEANNINE AVERSA, Associated Press Writer
Friday, September 12, 2003
©2003 Associated Press

(09-12) 14:17 PDT WASHINGTON (AP) --

After splurging in July, America's shoppers spent more modestly in August amid higher energy prices and job losses.

Sales at the nation's retailers rose by 0.6 percent last month, following a brisk 1.3 percent sales increase registered in July, the Commerce Department reported Friday.

Although August's sales performance was weaker than the 1.5 percent gain that economists were forecasting, analysts said consumers are still spending at a healthy pace and are keeping their wallets and pocketbooks sufficiently open to help along the economy's recovery.

"Consumer spending rose solidly in August, even if it was expected to be up even more than we saw," said Joel Naroff, president of Naroff Economic Advisors.

Excluding sales of automobiles, which can swing widely from month to month, sales at all other merchants rose by 0.7 percent in August -- close to economists' predictions for a 0.8 percent rise.

On Wall Street, stocks edged higher. The Dow Jones industrials gained 11.79 points to close at 9,471.55.

In a second report, higher costs for energy and food helped to boost wholesale prices 0.4 percent in August, following a tiny 0.1 percent increase in July, the Labor Department said.

Energy prices shot up 1.2 percent last month, mostly due to a 6.3 percent jump in gasoline prices. Food prices rose 0.7 percent last month, compared with a 0.2 percent dip in July. Higher energy and food prices can put a strain on some households' budgets, leaving them with less money to spend on other things, economists said.

Concerns about higher gasoline prices helped dampen consumer confidence in early September, economists said. The University of Michigan's index of consumer sentiment dipped to 88.2 in September from 89.3 in August, a preliminary reading showed.

Consumers, whose spending accounts for roughly two-thirds of all economic activity in the United States, have kept the economy going since the 2001 recession. And they will play an important role in determining the strength of the anticipated rebound in the second half of this year.

Some economists believe growth in the final six months of this year will clock in at a rate in the range of around 3.5 percent to just more than 4 percent. Others think it will be closer to a 5 percent pace. Either scenario would be better than the 2.3 percent growth rate seen in the first six months.

Against that backdrop, the Federal Reserve is likely to hold a key short-term interest rate at a 45-year low of 1 percent when it meets on Sept. 16, economists said.

Larger paychecks and other incentives coming from President Bush's third tax cut left people with extra money to spend and contributed to the brisk gain in retail sales in July, economists said. Because July's sales were so good, some economists believed that August's sales would have to show a bit of a slowdown.
Worries about jobs -- the economy lost 93,000 positions in August -- also played a role in less robust sales in August, economists said.

In August, sales of automobiles and parts rose 0.5 percent, down from a 2.4 percent advance in July. That puzzled some economists who noted that other reports showed that unit sales of automobiles in August were strong.

"The escalation of some incentives in July took away from some sales in August and there appears to be a pattern of more sales of moderately priced vehicles in August," Paul Taylor, chief economist at the National Automobile Dealers Association, said in trying to explain the government's figures.

Sales at gasoline stations rose 2.7 percent in August, reflecting higher prices at the pump. Excluding gasoline station sales, retail sales rose 0.5 percent.

At electronics and appliance stores, sales increased 1.4 percent last month, down from a 1.6 percent gain the previous month. Department store sales went up 0.4 percent last month, compared with a 1.2 percent increase in July

Sales at sporting goods, books, music and hobby stores increased 1.5 percent in August, a turnaround from July's 0.6 percent decline. At bars and restaurants, sales rose 1.4 percent, up from a 0.5 percent rise in July.

At clothing stores, sales fell 1.4 percent, reversing July's 1.2 percent gain.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On the Net:
Retail sales: www.commerce.gov/

Producer Price Index:
http://www.bls.gov/ppi

©2003 Associated Press


http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/news/archive/2003/09/12/financial1542EDT0208.DTL&type=printable

OK so what I read is that the August figures are "Downbeat" only in relation to unexpectedly robust July performance ... not illogical, in my book.
0 Replies
 
timberlandko
 
  1  
Reply Sat 13 Sep, 2003 01:31 pm
Credit Card Debt Slows
Quote:
U.S. Credit Card Debt Grows Slowly in July
NewsStand - Monday, September 08, 2003


AFX News Limited
WASHINGTON (AFX)

WASHINGTON (AFX) -- U.S. consumer debt grew at an annual pace of 4 percent in July, with almost all the gains coming from auto loans and other non-revolving debt, the Federal Reserve said Monday. Consumer debt grew $6 billion to $1.774 trillion in July after rising just $100 million in June, the Fed said. A month ago, the Fed estimated that credit fell $400 million in June. Revolving debt such as credit cards grew $300 million in July, or 0.5 percent annualized, after falling $1.3 billion in June, or 2.1 percent annualized. Non-revolving debt, such as auto loans or student loans, rose $5.7 billion in July, or 6.6 percent annualized, after rising $1.4 billion, or 1.6 percent, in June. The Fed's figures do not include mortgages and other loans secured by real estate. Economists figure the slowdown in consumer credit growth in recent months reflects massive refinancing and home equity loans in response to very low interest rates. Homeowners were able to pay down their credit card debt or borrow against their homes instead of taking out other loans. Over the past year, consumer debt has grown 3.3 percent, the slowest pace in 10 years. However, there's no evidence consumer spending has slowed. Retail sales are up 5.6 percent in the past year.


One may draw whatever conclusions one wishes, however the facts as presented lead me to conclude the doomsayers are, as typical of the breed lately, well off the mark.
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Sat 13 Sep, 2003 01:36 pm
timber and Scrat, Here's another perspective on why I don't see economic growth. I've done some calculations on how the market performed on the DOW and Nasdaq since 1999. For example, if one had $1,000 invested in the DOW and another $1,000 in the Nadaq in 1999, they would have lost at each year end the equivalent to 38 percent of their investments as of last Friday's close, so the $2,000 would now be worth $1,242. In order to make up that 38 percent loss, they must gain 60 percent to make up for the loss. Your 6 percent retail gains just ain't gonna cut it, because it's profits that counts, not sales gains.
0 Replies
 
Lightwizard
 
  1  
Reply Sat 13 Sep, 2003 01:40 pm
It's a bumpy road in retail right now and in my business which isn't strictly retail as also sell other retailers, the profit margin is down. It's a buyer's market but people have to have the confidence that they are spending money they can make back and some want to have a substantial cushion before they put out any big bucks. All retailers will reduce prices with the idea of increasing volume. But if it just sustains volume or there is only a small increase in volume over a quarter, six months and a year, the end profit can often be lower than expectations. Credit is also a motivator for consumers -- long terms with no payments and interest are all over the place. Credit has always been an aspect within sales rather than accounting.

I've been on somewhat of a spending spree myself because you can't take it with you. Now I've reached the cut-off where I feel I've reached my limit and do not want to spend any more. If a bargain comes along in lighting or fine art, I certainly will still grab it, that's for sure.
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Sat 13 Sep, 2003 01:42 pm
timber, The consumer debt has grown only 3.3 percent because 9.1 million people are out of jobs. When we keep reducing the working class, consumer debt goes down. On the same token, bankruptcies and mortgage payment delinquencies which lags foreclosures have gone up.
0 Replies
 
Lightwizard
 
  1  
Reply Sat 13 Sep, 2003 01:46 pm
No matter what, the old saying goes that you can't make a silk purse out of a sow's ear.
0 Replies
 
timberlandko
 
  1  
Reply Sat 13 Sep, 2003 01:48 pm
The bubble of the late '90s was abberational, c.i., and just about guaranteed a massive correction; take a look at the 5-year performance of the DOW and tell me what it evidences. I see steady recovery over the past two quarters, with the upward trend accellerating.
http://ichart.yahoo.com/zr?s=^DJI&t=5y&q=l&l=off&z=m&a=v&p=s
For an even more telling example, look at the 70-year history:

http://ichart.yahoo.com/zr?s=^DJI&t=my&q=l&l=off&z=m&a=v&p=s
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Sat 13 Sep, 2003 01:53 pm
timber, Looking at a 70 year trend is meaningless in my humble opinion. The economy of 70 years ago has no relationship to the economy of today - domestically or globally. What is more telling is five year increments going back and going forward.
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
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
  1. Forums
  2. » The US Economy
  3. » Page 8
Copyright © 2025 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.04 seconds on 03/10/2025 at 05:12:50