okie wrote:
Try it in London sometime, if you think its bad here. You would probably die of shock after one swig.
Starbucks tastes not too good everywhere - but the London branches actually make a better coffee to those in the USA.
However, I admit that the coffee in in London has more the European "taste direction" ... :wink:
HERE'S a good "lesson" on why the depreciating dollar is bad for our economy and the future of our country.
It mirrors much of what I've been saying the past couple of years.
I'm just wondering how the expected drop in tourism to Europe by Americans will affect their economies. With more American families losing their homes and cars, tourism is going to suffer a material drop in the coming months. It'll be interesting to watch. Save your home or go on vacation; that's not even a choice.
Are there stilll people out there who's listening to Bush and Bernanke that our economy is still okay?
All the economic signals tell us a different story; consumer confidence is down, spending is down, manufacturig is down, and people keep losing their homes and cars.
When will people wake up and smell the coffee? * If ever.
For those who bought homes with adjustable rate mortgages can now "walk away" from their purchase by paying about $1 thousand dollars to a service company. This is good for people who bought homes with no money down, and the home value is much less than the mortgage payments. Banks are going to be holding a whole lot of real estate with no cash. Poor management all around.
consumer spending is flat, not down.
Quote: WASHINGTON (Thomson Financial) - US January consumer spending growth rose a bit more than expected, but after adjusting for higher inflation, it was unchanged for the second month in a row, the Commerce Department reported today.
Nominal personal consumption rose 0.4 pct, up from the 0.3 pct increase in December and a tenth of a point higher than the 0.2 pct rise expected in the Thomson IFR Markets poll of economists.
However, after adjusting for higher prices, consumer spending was unchanged, as it was in December.
According to the several sources on our economy, retail sales is down. Maybe, you're looking at gasoline sales, but that's inflation, not increased sales.
http://bigpicture.typepad.com/comments/2008/02/retail-sales-sh.html
There was also an article in this morninng's San Jose Merc about retail sales, I'll find and post it later.
From the San Jose Mercury News:
Retailers report weakest January sales in nearly four decades
By John Boudreau
Mercury News
Article Launched: 02/07/2008 02:12:24 PM PST
From the bad economic news pile-on department: The nation's retailers delivered more somber details that the economy has more than the sniffles. Merchants reported their weakest January performance in nearly four decades, extending a malaise that has deepened since the holiday shopping season.
The sales figures made it clear that consumers wrestling with high gas and food prices, a slumping housing market, an escalating credit crisis and a weakening job market, buying mostly necessities even when redeeming their holiday gift cards. The disappointments cut across all sectors including discounters like Wal-Mart Stores, teen retailers including Pacific Sunwear of California and mall-based apparel chain Limited Brands. Even affluent shoppers are pulling back, hurting stores like Nordstrom.
"Clearly, this is a reflection of a very difficult environment for the consumer," said Ken Perkins, president of RetailMetrics, a research company in Swampscott, Mass. "It looks like consumer spending is stalling."
these are the business headlines of MSNBC today :
MSNBC - BUSINESS HEADLINES
ci my post is from the Commerce Department.
Sorry, dys, but what any department of this administration claims has about as much credibility as ican/Bush.
i hit the SUBMIT button a little too early .
Quote:Wall Street hammered by downbeat earnings
Stocks indexes fall sharply after data, earnings and another rise in oil prices stoke economic fear.
Fed's hands are full as economy tightens
Consumer spending was stalled again in January
U.S. consumer sentiment tumbles to 16-year low
i don't think that looks particularly good for the united states and the world as a whole .
source :
MSNBC - BUSINESS NEWS HEADLINES
cicerone imposter wrote:Sorry, dys, but what any department of this administration claims has about as much credibility as ican/Bush.
To the best of my knowledge however limited, the Commerce Dept is the only source of data re consumer spending, If you have a more valid source please share it with us.
The retail business, especially the big national chains, shares their sales and profit information frequently. Factories share information about reduction in demand and layoffs. The housing industry shares the reduction in demand, and the real estate business shares lower demand and loss of equity. The loss from subprime loans are affecting most banks and lendinng institutions, not only in the US, but impacts Europe and Asia.
Ford and GMC have been sharing the dismal sales of autos, and the banking industry has been sharing information on the repossession of autos from nonpayment.
cicerone imposter wrote:The retail business, especially the big national chains, shares their sales and profit information frequently. Factories share information about reduction in demand and layoffs. The housing industry shares the reduction in demand, and the real estate business shares lower demand and loss of equity. The loss from subprime loans are affecting most banks and lendinng institutions, not only in the US, but impacts Europe and Asia.
Ford and GMC have been sharing the dismal sales of autos, and the banking industry has been sharing information on the repossession of autos from nonpayment.
So I take it you don't have aggregate data on consumer spending. I also must assume that the 'news items" you do read are actually just interpretations of data originating from the Commerce Department. I noticed this morning that the AP and Forbes had articles about consumer spending taken directly from the Commerce Department data but reaching totally opposite conclusions. I prefer that the data I use be at least direct from the source rather than someone's interpretation of what someone else said.
No. When any retailer says their same store sales are down, I believe them. I also believe it when the big car makers says their sales are down compared to xxx. I also believe the real estate industry when they say that home sales are down, and that it takes much longer to sell a home. I also believe it when they tell us thousands are losing their homes. The realty industry has been keeping these records for several decades, and I believe when they tell us about trends in sales and the lose of value. I don't need the commerce department to learn about current economic activity, nor what to anticipate for the short term.
There's enough news from banks, financial institutions, the stock market, the retailers, manufacturers, and the consumers to get a good feel about our economy.
Good evening. I reckon I disagree with you, CI, about your cynicism about data coming from the Commerce or Labor departments. Are you suggesting that the career bean-counters, with their green eye-shades, are gathering and then manipulating the numbers at the behest of...someone. Wouldn't that be quite a massive conspiracy?
I am more skeptical of the retailers (my field) who report same store sales up for January. Only later do we find out that in December they sold one widget for $100 (that cost them $50), while in January they sold three widgets at $50 each (3 x $50 = $150) that cost them $50 each (3 x $50 = $150). Yep sales were up but...
I note today, when the stock markets were down sharply, that shares of GAP (stock symbol GPS) were up over 4%. The Gap operates stores under the Gap, Old Navy and Banana Republic flags. They have had an absolutely miserable last few years, with same store sales declining despite deep discounting. Compounding that was a revolving door style of management at the top and amongst their clothing design people. They have a long way to go, though, to remain viable in the notoriously fickle youth fashion business.
Well, isn't that nice; dys and rjb both disagree with me on the economy.
Couldn't wish for a better couple of dissenters.
Myabe, I can get some a2kers on my side of this battle.
FEBRUARY
I have mentioned before that my small chain of retail stores is one of 193 surveyed each month by the Federal Reserve Bank of Richmond for a "flash" report on how things might be appearing in our region (DC, MD, NC, SC, VA and most of WV) for the current month. About 105 firms respond in our "service sector" each month. We send in our little questionnaires on about the 20th of each month, and we get a summary on about the 27th.
I have been participating now for a year, and I am somewhat convinced that these "flash" results come pretty close to what is reported months later once things like sales tax revenue and payroll tax revenue is collected from us,
January was awful. February looks not quite so bad, but still bad. The retail sales volume continues to drop, but not quite as much as in January. The Fed reports that "shopper traffic" fell off terribly in February vs January.
Retailers in our survey report that they are pretty dramatically cutting their inventories. They aren't buying stuff.
Troubling to me is the expected trends in prices for the next six months amongst my brethern here in this survey. We expect increases of 3+% on an annualized basis.
So sales are flat at best, traffic is down, but prices are going to go up.
Stagflation.
From the NYT:
A bellwether report on Midwestern business activity unexpectedly fell to its lowest level in more than six years. A survey showed consumer confidence at a 16-year low. And analysts predicted that banks stand to lose an additional $350 billion from the subprime mortgage collapse.
We're not even close to the end of this downturn.
cicerone imposter wrote:Well, isn't that nice; dys and rjb both disagree with me on the economy.
Couldn't wish for a better couple of dissenters.
Myabe, I can get some a2kers on my side of this battle.
We had a similar discussion in regard to the unemployment statistics, ci, where you claim they are artificially too low, so I think you want to reject statistics if you don't like the numbers.
