114
   

Where is the US economy headed?

 
 
Ramafuchs
 
  1  
Reply Sat 12 Apr, 2008 08:04 pm
dyslexia
None care about the coporate controlled war-infested- non-intelligent plastitc regime of USA.(SUPER SUPER SUPER power)
But we as rational humanbeing care much about the innocent Americans.
My name is Rama and I have nothing to declare expect my honesty.
0 Replies
 
okie
 
  1  
Reply Sat 12 Apr, 2008 08:16 pm
real life wrote:
Quote:
Back to the subject of this thread.


The IMF blamed a "collective failure" of oversight for the market turmoil and urged investment and commercial banks to boost confidence by coming clean on their full exposure to the financial crisis.


Growth in the US, which sits at the epicentre of the current crisis, will only be 0.5 percent in 2008, the IMF said. Many economists say the US economy has entered a recession.

http://www.hindustantimes.


The American people became infatuated with real estate speculation.

Any honest observer will admit this.

Infomercials touting ways to get rich buying and 'flipping' real estate with no money down, etc have been clogging the airwaves for several years.

......

Very interesting point, real life. I had no idea the percentage of homes purchased as second homes or investment homes was as high as it was. I heard something on the news the other day, and this link confirms it.

http://www.realtor.org/press_room/news_releases/2006/secondhomesales05.html

"Second Home Sales Hit Another Record in 2005; Market Share Rises
WASHINGTON, April 05, 2006 - Vacation- and investment-home sales both set records in 2005, with the combined total of second home sales accounting for four out of 10 residential transactions, according to the National Association of Realtors®.

The annual report, based on two surveys, shows that 27.7 percent of all homes purchased in 2005 were for investment and another 12.2 percent were vacation homes. All together, there were 3.34 million second-home sales in 2005, up 16.0 percent from an upwardly revised total of 2.88 million in 2004. The market share of second homes rose from 36.0 percent of transactions in 2004 to 39.9 percent in 2005."


So if the housing market is becoming infested with investors more than it has before, then it is only logical that the housing market is going to suffer from that manipulation in the way of runups and dips, perhaps somewhat similar to the stock market, although not quite to that extent. This aspect of this problem reminded me that I know a few people with home investments, and now at at least a couple that I talked to recently that may be left holding the bag on a couple houses. I won't say it serves them right, but once houses become speculative, then such investments can suffer just like any other commodity, and so they should have known that.
0 Replies
 
Ramafuchs
 
  1  
Reply Sat 12 Apr, 2008 08:52 pm
As a school going child I got this message from my teacher in India.
" It was a hot summer in Athen
and the time is midday
around 1200 o'clock.
One guy with Oil lamp was slendering slowly in the main street.
One of the secrurity officer had politely asked this man
whether he had missed something?
or searching anything?
The man with oil lamp said.
I seek a human

.

I feel sorry to be a consumer in K?-LN
0 Replies
 
real life
 
  1  
Reply Sat 12 Apr, 2008 09:08 pm
Advocate wrote:
Real, a lot of the mortgagors were suckered into signing with lies and misleading statements. In fact, many mortgage company people are being indicted, with some pleading guilty.

For instance, people were told that that they had a fixed rate, when they didn't. (It was actually a fixed rate for, say, three years.) Many mortgages were written with the knowledge that the mortgagors did not qualify.

Perhaps not everyone has your education and can determine whether they are being screwed over.


I don't disagree. There is no doubt that the speculative atmosphere and overheated market attracted any number of crooks.

I think ordinary caution was thrown to the wind in a hurry to 'get a deal'. Crooks know how to manipulate human nature.

If I did not understand the documents I was signing, I would get somebody (such as an attorney, or someone representing MY interests) to review the documents for me before I signed.
0 Replies
 
Advocate
 
  1  
Reply Sat 12 Apr, 2008 09:22 pm
For a terrific rundown on our economy, including the dire straits it is in, see the following, in which the U. S. comptroller general weighs in.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=QxoP_9W6FC8
0 Replies
 
Ramafuchs
 
  1  
Reply Sat 12 Apr, 2008 10:42 pm
A corrupt criminal system has no chance to survive.
And USA's system is not above board.
0 Replies
 
hamburger
 
  1  
Reply Sun 13 Apr, 2008 09:22 am
there is now information leaking out that some FED members are quite concerned about a looming "deep recession" in the united states .
if a "deep recession" should take hold in the united states it will be felt around the world , i would think .
hbg


Quote:
Fed members worried about deep recession


Notes from March meeting show some concerned about major downturn
The Associated Press
updated 6:53 p.m. ET, Tues., April. 8, 2008

WASHINGTON - Worries about a deep recession ?- not a shallow one ?- drove Federal Reserve policymakers to slash a key interest rate last month, meeting minutes show.

Even as the Fed battled in almost unprecedented fashion to stem a widening credit and housing slump, some members fretted over the possibility of a "prolonged and severe" economic downturn. It was in that environment that they voted ?- with two dissents ?- to cut its most important interest rate by three-quarters of a percentage point to 2.25 percent. That action capped the most aggressive Fed intervention in a quarter-century.

Some Fed policymakers thought that such a widening recession could not be ruled out given the "further restriction of credit availability and ongoing weakness in the housing market," according to the meeting minutes that were made public Tuesday.

On Wall Street, stocks fell. The Dow Jones industrials lost 35.99 points.

Two Fed members ?- Charles Plosser, president of the Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia, and Richard Fisher, president of the Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas ?- opposed such a big rate reduction, however. They favored a smaller cut because of concerns about a potential inflation flare-up. It was a crack in the mostly unified front that the Fed often has projected to the public.

The minutes of the closed-door March meeting underscored the economic cross-currents pulling at Fed policymakers.

"With the uncertainties in the outlook for both economic activity and inflation elevated, members noted that appropriately calibrating the stance of (interest-rate) policy was difficult," the minutes stated.

On the one hand, the Fed has been urgently moving to prevent the trio of economic woes ?- housing, credit and financial?- from plunging the country into a deep recession. On the other hand, with soaring energy prices and high food costs, policymakers realize that they can't afford to let inflation get out of control, either.

Even with the big interest rate reduction in March, most Fed members saw overall inflation moderating in coming quarters, the minutes said. However, inflation pressures had picked up even as economic growth had weakened, the minutes added, suggesting that uncertainty clouded the inflation outlook.


Plosser and Fisher ?- the two who opposed the hefty three-quarter-point reduction in March ?- were "concerned that inflation expectations could potentially become unhinged," according to the minutes. If people, investors and businesses expect prices to rise sharply, they'll act in ways that will make inflation worse. Once inflation takes hold, it is hard to break."

Since last September, the Fed has been cutting rates to shore up the economy. One of the risks of lowering rates is that it can sow the seeds of inflation down the road. To battle inflation, the Fed usually boosts rates.

Against this backdrop, Bernanke, in a congressional appearance last week, didn't tip his hand about the Fed's next move on interest rates. Many economists, however, believe the Fed will lower rates again at its next regularly scheduled meeting on April 29-30, especially in light of the faltering employment market.


"Signals from the economy continue to come in on the weak side," said Brian Bethune, economist at Global Insight, who is predicting a half-point cut later this month.

The government reported last week that the economy lost jobs for the third month in a row in March. All told, the nation has lost 232,000 jobs in just three months ?- stark evidence of just how much the employment market has buckled under the weight of the economy's woes.

For the first time, Bernanke last week acknowledged that a recession is possible.

According to the Fed minutes, many members thought "some contraction in economic activity in the first half of 2008 now appeared likely."

The Fed found itself fighting a vicious cycle, where credit problems hurt the economy's outlook which in turns worsens credit problems, the minutes suggested. There was "evidence that an adverse feedback loop was under way," the minutes said.

Besides cutting rates, the Fed has taken a number of unconventional steps recently to ease a dangerous credit crisis.

Under one new program, the Fed has been letting big investment firms borrow super-safe Treasury securities and put up more risky investments, including certain shunned mortgage-backed securities as collateral. The Fed said it would make as much as $200 billion worth of Treasuries available through weekly auctions.


The goal is to make investment houses more inclined to lend to each other. It also is aimed at providing relief to the distressed market for mortgage-linked securities. Questions about their value and dumping of these securities have driven up mortgage rates, aggravating the housing crisis.

Fed policymakers thought the program "could prove useful in preventing an escalation of an unhealthy dynamic" that has gripped credit markets, according to the minutes of a March 10 conference call that led to the creation of the new program.

Separately, in the broadest use of its lending authority since the 1930s, the Fed last month agreed to temporarily let investment firms obtain emergency financing from the Fed, a privilege that previously had been granted only to commercial banks.


© 2008 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
URL: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/24015213/

0 Replies
 
hamburger
 
  1  
Reply Sun 13 Apr, 2008 09:42 am
okie wrote :

Quote:
I had no idea the percentage of homes purchased as second homes or investment homes was as high as it was .


for a number of years we have spend a few weeks in myrtle beach or hilton head island during the cold canadian winter .
we were surprised right from the beginning about the condos and vacation homes right along the atlantic coast .
we were even more surprised that from november to march most would be sitting empty .
as the years went by , more and more highrise condos have been springing up there . having spent a few weeks on the atlantic coast of florida , we saw similar developments .
some retired americans from the colder regions - such as chicago and new york state - spent the winter months there , renting a condo at pretty reasonable rates .
we would usually rent a fully equipped two bedroom condo with access to a health club for about $1,000 a month - multi-months rents were even lower . these units would rent for as much as $150-200 a day during the high season .
americans would tell us that these second homes were often purchased for investment purposes . they also said that the interest costs of these condos might entitle the owner to tax deductions - so all-in-all could be a very smart investment .
i now see that at least some of these units are being sold at bargain basement prices .
an ad in last week's NYT showed vacation homes in vero beach that had an original price of $20-25 million and had been reduced by 50% were now being advertised for a price BELOW 50% . i guess this might be the time for some people to buy - but not for yours truly :wink: .
hbg
0 Replies
 
hawkeye10
 
  1  
Reply Sun 13 Apr, 2008 10:14 am
The economy is supposed to direct money to the most useful purposes, make the best use of social assets. When we started plowing multiple tens of billions into homes that are rarely used we have evidence of a problem. The second and third home fad took off about a decade ago, because tax law encouraged it and because real estate speculation became very profitable. Speculators suck much out of the economy, and at least with real estate speculation the little guy was able to take part in the gravy train unlike most other domains for the endeavour, but it should have been clamped down.
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Sun 13 Apr, 2008 02:46 pm
Most of those who speculated on real estate used to brag they were making hundreds of thousands of dollars; most are now dead broke. And most of those folks can't even find a job at McDonalds; no skills.

That old saying, if it's too good to be true, it usually is. Unfortunately, even good honest, hard-working, folks got caught up in the buy frenzy, and now millions are losing their homes, because they got sloppy about their personal finances.
0 Replies
 
okie
 
  1  
Reply Sun 13 Apr, 2008 04:43 pm
ci, I agree, and to take the logical conclusion a bit further, it makes no sense to bail this sort of behavior out, otherwise the government would essentially be encouraging more of it.

Perhaps, a "recession" is nothing more than a "correction," which is a necessary and healthy thing in the grand scheme of things, not only for a market, but also the economy.
0 Replies
 
Ramafuchs
 
  1  
Reply Sun 13 Apr, 2008 04:45 pm
Okie
most of the idiots who had allowed this another kind of war had met in NY
today= yesterday.
Barbaric corporate culture pure and unadulterated.
0 Replies
 
au1929
 
  1  
Reply Mon 14 Apr, 2008 09:33 am
By PAUL KRUGMAN
Published: April 14, 2008
The Survey Research Center of the University of Michigan has been tracking American economic perceptions since the 1950s. On Friday the center released its latest estimate of the consumer sentiment index ?- and it was a stunner. Americans are more pessimistic about their situation than they have been for more than a quarter century.

Skip to next paragraph

Paul Krugman

Go to Columnist Page » Blog: The Conscience of a Liberal Meanwhile, a recent Pew report found that the percentage of Americans saying that they're better off than they were five years ago is at its lowest level in 44 years of polling.

What's striking about this bleak mood is that by the usual measures the economy isn't doing that badly ?- at least not yet. In particular, the official unemployment rate of 5.1 percent, though rising, is still fairly low by historical standards. Yet economic attitudes are worse now than they were in 1992, when the average unemployment rate was 7.5 percent.

Why are we feeling so down?

Our bleakness partly reflects the fact that most Americans are doing considerably worse than the usual economic measures let on. The official unemployment rate may be relatively low ?- but the percentage of prime-working-age Americans without jobs, which isn't the same thing, is historically high. Gross domestic product is up, but the inflation-adjusted income of the median family is probably lower than it was in 2000.

Beyond that, perceptions of the current economy are strongly influenced by the public's sense of the larger pattern.

When Ronald Reagan famously asked, "Are you better off than you were four years ago?," the correct answer was "Yes." Median household income, adjusted for inflation, was higher in 1980 than it had been in 1976. But gas lines and double-digit inflation made people feel that things were falling apart.

Conversely, unemployment was still historically high when Reagan proclaimed "Morning in America." But people were ready to hear an upbeat message, because the economic storm seemed to have passed.

More recently, economic confidence held up relatively well during the 2001 recession, maybe because people were willing to see it as no more than a temporary interruption of the great 1990s boom.

A major reason we're feeling so down now is that for working Americans the boom never did come back. Job creation in the post-2001 recovery was pathetic by Clinton-era standards; wages barely kept up with inflation. Instead, corporate profits and the incomes of a tiny elite surged ?- sucking up so much of the economy's growth that only crumbs were left for everyone else.

Now the boom that wasn't has gone bust ?- and Americans, understandably, have lost confidence in the prospects for a return to real prosperity.

They have also, I'd suggest, lost confidence in the integrity of our economic institutions.

Early this decade, when the great corporate scandals broke ?- Enron, WorldCom, and so on ?- I expected big-business corruption to become a major political issue. It didn't, partly because the march to war had the effect of changing the subject, partly, perhaps, because Americans weren't ready to take a broadly negative view of the system that brought them the previous decade's boom.

But my impression is that the subprime crisis ?- with its revelation that titans of finance were dealing in funny money and its tales of failed executives receiving hundred-million-dollar going-away presents ?- has resurrected the sense that something is rotten in the state of our economy. And this sense is adding to the general gloom.

The question is, can the next administration end America's malaise?

Some of the causes of poor economic performance since 2000 are probably beyond any administration's control. Raw materials were cheap in the 1990s, but in the years ahead the rise of China and other emerging economies will place increasing pressure on world supplies of oil, copper and so on, no matter what the next president does.

But reinvigorated regulation could help restore confidence to the financial system. A return to pro-labor policies could help raise real wages. Pro-competitive policies ?- which are not the same thing as giving powerful businesses whatever they want ?- could help America regain its leadership in information technology. In other words, there's a lot that could be done to perk up our sagging confidence.

That won't happen, however, unless the next president is someone who understands what went wrong. And right now, that doesn't look at all certain
0 Replies
 
realjohnboy
 
  1  
Reply Mon 14 Apr, 2008 02:04 pm
realjohnboy wrote:

And BTW, I am hearing but can't confirm that another big NYC firm is teetering this weekend. I certainly may be wrong about that.


Okay, so Wachovia is a NC bank, not NYC. But they tried to play with the big guys by paying something like $20 billion for a CA mortgage brokerage firm a couple of years ago. Bad idea.
Wachovia lost something like $400 million in the 1st Q and is looking for someone to pump in $8 billion. I am looking for Suntrust or Bank of America to take them out.
0 Replies
 
dyslexia
 
  1  
Reply Mon 14 Apr, 2008 02:21 pm
The Wild Bird store in our neighborhood closed down for good. I hope the wild birds stick around. I mean, REALLY can the economy be SO bad as to close a Wild Bird store?
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Mon 14 Apr, 2008 02:50 pm
From Krugman: Some of the causes of poor economic performance since 2000 are probably beyond any administration's control. Raw materials were cheap in the 1990s, but in the years ahead the rise of China and other emerging economies will place increasing pressure on world supplies of oil, copper and so on, no matter what the next president does.

Yeah, but, Bush didn't help our economy one bit; his Harvard MBA degree didn't do any good. Bush created the biggest national debt, got us involved in a war that has no end game that's costing us 2.7 billion every week, and he wants to "stay the course." Leave it for the next "sucker" who thinks they can fix what's over 90 percent broken. The next president will require more than good advisors to overcome the disaster Bush created for our country.
0 Replies
 
Ragman
 
  1  
Reply Mon 14 Apr, 2008 04:25 pm
That's it in a nutshell. CI. Pretty bleak. I just think that all of these campaign speeches make me sick because none of these people have a clue what they're talking about as far as fixing what's broken in this impending economic disaster.
0 Replies
 
Ramafuchs
 
  1  
Reply Mon 14 Apr, 2008 05:31 pm
Ragman
Please excuse me.
If only NY or NO we all can save the humanity.
But this rotten uncontrollered barbarism spreads all over the globe.
Ask anyone who begs for pttiace around the city you dwell.
Sorry for my adjectives..
Change should not be a slogan to pick up another doll to continue this nonsense.
0 Replies
 
Ragman
 
  1  
Reply Mon 14 Apr, 2008 05:38 pm
I have no clue about what you're writing. I will no longer respond to your comments. They just make no sense at all to me.

And, you are off-topic. How does this relate at all to US economic situation? If you so dislike USA and its policies, open up your own thread.
0 Replies
 
Ramafuchs
 
  1  
Reply Mon 14 Apr, 2008 05:43 pm
Thanks
Vanakkam
namesthe
nandree.
A2K is to educate the ignorant participants and enliven the forum.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

The States Need Help - Discussion by Robert Gentel
Fiscal Cliff - Question by JPB
Let GM go Bankrupt - Discussion by Woiyo9
Sovereign debt - Question by JohnJD
 
Copyright © 2026 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.09 seconds on 03/11/2026 at 10:36:13