The US Economy

timber, I also understand the concept of greed, and why the bubble wasn't going to last. We have consistently gained on our retirment investments during the past five years. Even though I have been withdrawing money for my personal expenses during that same period, we've gained every year. I have never listened to those "experts," and I rarely do.

OVERALL DELINQUENCY RATE DOWN

Corrections are indeed inevitable. CI is right, though, about the vast changes in the economy which make plain graphics irrelevant. The important thing about any economy is what it's doing for those who are living it. I think we can agree that for 'way too many people in this country alone, the past two years have been pretty bad economically. There are a number of economists out there -- Stiglitz and Krugman are among them as is Galbraith, though less visible -- who look at the whole picture even as they are well-versed in stats and "factors." They are like meteorologists who lean out the window as well as check their computers.

Eight hundreth of a percent decrease in delinquencies hardly speaks to economic growth - unless I'm missing something.

I gotta say that dismissing the overall historic trend is a bit disingenuous, IMHO. The 70-Year chart indicates to me that following a logical period of downward correction, the market, and hence the economy, remains in good shape, exhibiting the greatest, most rapid, longest-sustained expansion in history.

Indeed you are missing something ... the "eight hundredths of a percent" to which you refer represents a 6.7% decline (1.12/1.20 = .933333) ... pretty significant, and quite encouraging.

I would point out also that more wealth has been created in the past 20 years than existed over the previous 200. If you're gonna talk about "The Big Picture", look at The Big Picture.

timber's quote:
"I would point out also that more wealth has been created in the past 20 years than existed over the previous 200. If you're gonna talk about "The Big Picture", look at The Big Picture."

I never said anything about more wealth creation for more in this world. Since you brought it up, my siblings and I come from very modest backgrounds. I have never dreamed as a child that I would have the wherewithal to be traveling around this world as often as I please. Nor that my brothers and sisters have been so successful, as are our children. We're living proof that I have looked at the "big picture." So, what's your point? We're talking about the current and future economic growth of this country and the worlds.

The point is ya can't have it both ways, c.i. ... the "Big Picture", IMO, invalidates your arguments, and your relative personal and familial successes merely confirm that contention.

All my arguments? Wow, what abilities you have.

Scrat's quote: "when in fact they were up a little." Up a little doesn't portend a economic recovery. It's barely holding on.

Did I say anything about "All Your Arguments", c.i.? I believe my reference clearly refers only to your your arguments in support of your contention that your appraisal of the economic situation is more correct than is mine. Further, I would submit that whether or not you accept my contention, I have offered significant support for same, while I sense that you, among the doomsayers, find it inconvenient to accept that recovery is real, significant, sustainable, and unimpeded by ongoing events and currently available indicators. It would appear that some folks want so badly, in their desire to discredit The Current Administration, for the economy to fail they will take great pains to attempt to effect, or at least imply, that failure. I fully expect that approach to fail utterly.

Boy, timber, you just aren't reading my posts. I admitted that my opinion differs from the "experts," so how in the world do you expect me to provide "significant support?" It's only my "opinion." Do you want me to find a definition for "MY OPINION?" Fact is, only the future will provide the answers. Get back to me in 12 months, and we'll discuss it again.

Hey, c.i. ... I ain't pickin' on ya, and if I got a little rough, I appologize ... didn't mean ta hurt ya, just ta dispute ya ... hope ya understand. Sometimes I play a little hard, I know. And you bet ... I'm more than willing to revisit this topic a year from now. I suspect in fact we will

You know, all these graphs and predictions are really pipe dreaming. I always equated economists with alchemists -- if they are really accurate about the future and have basically the same credentials, why are their predictions 180 deg. in conflict with one another? They don't know because they do not have a crystal ball -- they are just funnin with you. The sustainability is the key word and if it continues to bounce up and down like it has been doing with no quarter actually showing a significant improvement in nearly all the sectors, right now improvement in employment would be a major factor, the economy is still going to be accessed as sluggish. I don't think those jobs are going to come back anytime soon and that makes the administration look bad. It's now a Bush economy -- no scapegoats.

THE U.S. ECONOMY
hi there participants : as a canadian i guess i should't be too concerned about the u.s. economy, but since we are neighbours, i can't help showing an interest. i'm also mindful of the u.s. economy's influence on the world economy. listened to good, old walter croncite being interviewed on larry king. i think walter has not lost his clarity in assessing the situation of the world and the u.s. in particular; i also think he has not lost his "bite" and also shows some good humour even in a stressful situation. here is an article that bears his unmistaken trademark of using simple language to disect a difficult problem. http://interestalert.com/brand/siteia.shtml?Story=st/sn/09060002aaa031fa.albu&Sys=print&Fid=OPINIONS&Type=News&Filter=Opinions&S=siteia

hbg, You're welcome to participate as a Canook on the US eocnomy or anything else that meets your fancy. I actually think you have a mucy better perspective than most Americans. In fact, the US economy impacts the world economy, and visa-versa. As a global ecoomy, the US must be more mindful of how our government handles their feduciary responsibilities. In my estimation, they are failing the world.

Timber - Good to see you again and in such good form. The general tenor of this discussion has begun to remind me of an old saw...

"There are none so blind as those who will not see."

CI is a good guy, and excellent debater (no, not a "master" :wink: ) and clearly quite intelligent, but on this issue I can't help but conclude that his mind is made up and the facts be damned! (No offense, CI, you know I love you!)

Clearly nobody knows for certain what the future holds, but I find your arguments and mine--which take available data into consideration rather than attempting to wish it away--far more rational and compelling than the alternative.

Some things to consider, and perhaps discuss.

1) re the current 6.1% unemployment rate: The average unemployment since WWII has been 5.75%. The present figures are less than one half of one percent above the historic average for more than 50 years ... undesireable, yes. Dramatic, seriously troubling, a crisis pressaging doom, hardly. In cold, realistic perspective, it is a minor blip, no matter how inconvenient it may be for those presently unable to find work.

2) re "Job Loss": The fundamental nature of the economy is undergoing change likely as significant as the change witnessed at the turn of the last century; new technologies are shifting the employment picture dramatically. A hundred years ago, the bulk of the working population was employed in agrarian-related, natural-resource intensive industries, and was primarily rural. As the Twentieth Century progressed, employment shifted to the production of consumer hardgoods and the population became increasingly urban. All the while, productivity in agrarian-related industries expanded exponentially, freeing labor to participate in growing industrialization. At the beginning of the Twentieth Century, over 60% of the workforce was agrarian-related; at the end of the Twentieth Century, less than 2% of the workforce was agrarian-related, while real agrarian output had increased several hundredfold. As the Twenty First Century develops, it plainly is evident the economy is shifting from the production of consumer hardgoods to technologic services while the population is shifting from urban to suburban. Increases in hardgoods production productivity is freeing labor to participate in the emerging technologic economy, just as a century ago increases in agrarian productivity permitted the shift to an emergent industrial economy. Change is inevitable, brings about upheaval, and historically brings about progress found by some to be inconvenient, even disastrous, while materially benefitting by far the greater proportion of the populace.

3) re GDP: During the Recession of 2001, the GDP grew at .3% annualized. In all prior recessions, the GDP has contracted. Even allowing for inflation, the GDP did not contract in this recession, making it the mildest recession in history, and the only one ever to actually tally real growth, small though that was. A real argument may be made that the 2001 recession in fact did not meet the traditional full definition of "Recession", but rather more accurately was a "Correction" following an abberational period of atypically accellerated growth.

All in all, the way I see it, things ain't so bad as some folks wish they were.

as someone much more knowledgeable than I once said, "ask 10 economists what is happening and you will get 15 answers" seems this topic is proving that to be accurate.