Where is the US economy headed?

okie calls everything Marxism, because his knowledge about economics is nil.

fm, my fear is that the economy will bounce back to an extent, as it would anyway, but timed when Obama sees it advantageous to start talking up the economy to make it look like the stimulus package did it. His spending will stimulate the economy on a limited basis, temporarily, but long term its not a solution, in fact it perpetuates the underlying problems that are part of the cause. I want the country to succeed, but I do not want Obama to succeed, because Obama succeeding means America fails in the long term, because his policies are bad for the country.

What you describe, fm, is just supporting or not supporting what you believe in. If you believe in central planning and Big Brother, you should love this administration. I don't. I love freedom too much to capitulate to it. And I think this bunch in Washington is a bunch of arrogant, power hungry, egotists, that are on a mission to do alot of things, none of it seems to be any good.

Lambast Limbaugh if you feel like it, he is probably on Obama's enemies list, and the lefties would love nothing better than to shut up their opposition. Its called freedom of speech.

okie, As usual, you don't know what you are talking about. Quit, while you are behind.

ci, are you now the self appointed person to sit there all day long, waiting for a post of mine, then to post some inane comment about my intelligence? Don't you have something better to do? Are you that bankrupt for any enjoyment in life, or is that it, ci? Why don't you go spend your money and take your family on a cruise or something, or better yet, save the money and give it to Obama. Be patriotic, spread your wealth around.

The truth of this administration will not and cannot be changed by all the blind loyalty to Obamamania. Try as you might, it won't change it.

okie wrote:

Just how did you come to this conclusion, oh wise one? You stupid dipshit!

If somebody starts instituting policies that are in the longterm very destructive, it is not wise to endorse what they are doing, simple as that. I do not want to see short term what appears to be success, so that the policies are believed to be successful, such that greater harm is done in the long term.

Beyond that, I do not think I need to answer your insults anymore. Anytime I see such, I will click the thumbs down. I wish you happiness, ci, maybe Obama can give it to you.

Please explain to us novices how Obama's policies "are in the longterm very destructive?"

FYI, Obama is not responsible for my happiness. You dimwit.

Yes, it's getting a little hot in here, CI, Okie's not a dipshit.

I will ask ya again though Okie: do you consider Greenspan to be a Marxist? He is recommending the same thing I am.

Cycloptichorn

Cyclo, You are free to defend okie all you want, but it will not stop me from challenging his idiocy from one stupid post to the next.

It's okay to challenge his idiocy - I do enough of that myself with many here - but he's not a dipshit. I don't even know what dipshit means. Truthfully he is one of the better Republican posters here, though a little addled lately with Obama's victory and the marching hordes of Liberals who have taken the place over.

Cycloptichorn

I really don't mind "addled," but his posts are totally his opinions without so much as any evidence to support them, and taken from his cockeyed imagination. Some people are confused, and some like okie are out of his league.

Okie- You have to understand Cicerone Imposter. He is too stupid to debate. As I have pointed out frequently,he is senile. Ask him how old he is. He is close to his middle seventies--Close to dementia. That is why he cannot do research.
Be merciful to him as you would be to a Down's syndrome child.

I think you are incorrect, farmerman. First of all, it is undeniable that when anyone says the word-STIMULUS-the answer is OBAMA. If,as you say, the stimulus works, then the Democrats will prosper, but you must keep several things in mind.

l. The Congressional Budget Office does not agree with Obama's estimate of jobs to be gained after this incredible spending spree gets into the country---

2.The 2010 elections will be coming up soon. Campaigning will begin in earnest in Jan. 2010,less than a year away. The American people are impatient and largely uninformed. If the Stock Market does not recover by the beginning of 2010 and if 401K's are still in the toilet by Jan. 2010, the Democrats might well find themselves where Clinton found himself in 2004.

3. The Fed has just revised its forecast for 2009.

Note:

Markets Open Markets Closed5:46 PM 19/02/2009 AEST5:46 PM 19/02/2009 AEST
AU:XAO 3,398.00 +28.70 +0.85% 5:06:59 PM 02/19/2009
US:DJIA 7,555.63 +3.03 +0.04% 4:02:00 PM 02/19/2009
HK:HSI 12,934.17 -81.83 -0.63% 2:48:11 PM 02/19/2009
US:SP500 788.42 -0.75 -0.10% 4:59:55 PM 02/18/2009
UK:UKX 4,006.83 -27.30 -0.68% 4:35:00 PM 02/18/2009
AU:XJO 3,448.90 +35.70 +1.05% 5:07:00 PM 02/19/2009
JP:NI225 7,557.65 +23.21 +0.31% 3:00:39 PM 02/19/2009
AU:QAN 1.75 +0.03 +1.45% 4:10:00 PM 02/19/2009
US:NWS 6.78 -0.04 -0.59% 4:00:00 PM 02/18/2009
US:GOOG 353.11 +10.45 +3.05% 4:00:00 PM 02/18/2009
US:YHOO 12.22 +0.20 +1.66% 4:00:00 PM 02/18/2009
US:GC09G 977.70 +10.70 +1.11% 11:57:00 AM 02/03/2009
US:CL09F Loading... Loading... Loading... Loading...
US:HG09H 1.44 +0.01 +0.91% 12:28:00 PM 02/18/2009
US:W09H 510.75 -4.75 -0.92% 2:22:00 PM 02/18/2009
Enter ASX code or company name for the latest stock quotes information
Go










US Federal Reserve lowers forecast for US economyFont Size: Decrease Increase Print Page: Print Meena Thiruvengadam | February 19, 2009
Article from: Dow Jones Newswires
CITING a "continued sharp contraction in real economic activity," the Federal Open Market Committee says it is expecting gross domestic product to contract by up to 1.3 per cent in 2009, a larger drop than it had forecast in October.

US Federal Reserve chairman Ben Bernanke speaks to the National Press Club in Washington. Picture: Bloomberg
The FOMC is now projecting the economy will drop anywhere from 0.5 per cent to 1.3 per cent in 2009. Back in October, members were more sanguine, projecting a range of a 0.2 per cent fall to an increase of 1.1 per cent.

That contraction would be followed by GDP growth of 2.5 per cent to 3.3 per cent in 2010 and growth of 3.8 per cent to 5 per cent in 2011, minutes of the FOMC's latest meeting show. The FOMC last met on January 27 and January 28. On a longer-term basis, the committee is expecting GDP growth of between 2.5 per cent and 2.7 per cent.

"Participants generally expected that strains in financial markets would ebb only slowly and hence that the pace of recovery in 2010 would be damped," the minutes said.

The Federal Reserve typically has provided projections for output growth, unemployment and inflation for three-year periods, but it is extending the length of its projections. Longer-term forecast horizons now could span five to six years, Fed chairman Ben Bernanke said in a speech.

The Fed's latest projections show the FOMC expects unemployment this year could rise as high as 8.8 per cent, higher than its October projection of 7.1 per cent to 7.6 per cent. January's unemployment rate hit 7.6 per cent, according to Labour Department.

Under the Fed's forecasts, unemployment rates would fall to between 8 per cent and 8.3 per cent in 2010 and to between 6.7 per cent and 7.5 per cent in 2011, according to the projections, which are higher than the Fed's October estimates. Unemployment on a longer-term basis is expected to hit between 4.8 per cent and 5 per cent.

"Participants anticipated that labour market conditions would deteriorate substantially further over the course of this year, and nearly all expected that unemployment would still be well above its longer-run sustainable rate at the end of 2011," the minutes said.

The Fed's forecast shows core inflation is expected to fall to between 0.9 per cent to 1.1 per cent this year and could contract further in the coming years. The Fed in October expected 2009 core inflation of between 1.5 per cent and 2 per cent.

Core inflation is expected to be between 0.8 per cent and 1.5 per cent in 2010 and 0.7 per cent to 1.5 per cent in 2011. No longer-term estimate for core inflation was provided.

"FOMC participants viewed the outlook for economic activity and inflation as having weakened significantly since last October, when their last projections were made," the minutes said.

Separately, the Fed said in the minutes that FOMC members saw no indication that the housing sector was beginning to stabilise. Some members expressed concern that the commercial real-estate sector could deteriorate sharply in the months ahead. Members expected rapid contraction in categories of business investment to continue in coming quarters.

Looking ahead, FOMC members anticipated tax cuts and other elements of the proposed fiscal stimulus package would beef up incomes and elevate consumer spending, though the magnitude of the spur was "far from clear".

"For example, unless the cuts were clearly perceived to be permanent, the boost to consumer spending might prove short-lived, as was the case with the tax rebates distributed in the spring of 2008," the minutes said

END OF QUOTE

Now,Farmerman--Please tell me how this can be!! Is the Fed. wrong? How could the Dow Jones keep going down down down and how could the FED.give such a gloomy forecast for 2009.

The stimulus package has passed!

Obama is a charismatic leader!

How could the Dow keep falling and how could the Fed.make such gloomy predictions for the future?

Are they trying to sabotage Obama???

No. I thought you advocated the government nationalize the auto industry. I don't recall Greenspan doing that. If so, post the backup, and I would reconsider.

Is there a real difference between them and the banks? We can't afford to let either fail and throwing good money after bad is a stupid idea either way. Both industries have ran themselves into the ground through poor management.

Why would it be right to nationalize the banks to save them, but wrong to do the auto companies?

Cycloptichorn

Come on, cyclops, obviously there is a huge difference. I can see, here we go with incrementalism, the slippery slope. I don't recall an FDIC to insure somebody's car, for example. The monetary system is on another level from consumer products, obviously. The government has always had their finger into the banking industry on a different level than other industries, to try to insure the monetary system, which forms the skeleton of our entire economy. In contrast, nationalizing the auto industry, you might as well nationalize the energy industry, the steel industry, agriculture, the list goes on, I don't see any difference, then hello a communist country.

So you obviously twisted what Greenspan said, to claim he agreed with you. Cycolops, can you be more honest than that?

Why cant we afford to let them fail?
The same arguments you are using have been used throughout our history, I would imagine, to protect every industry that either refused to modernize or was mismanaged.
From the buggywhip industry on.
If the auto industry cant or wont modernize, they dont need to be propped up.
Let them fail, let them be bought out by investors, and let them either sink or swim on their own merits.

And, you really think the govt can manage them any better?
The same govt that cant run a whorehouse and show a profit (Mustang Ranch), you think they can run the auto industry?

mm, I agree; why are taxpayers propping up the auto companies and not other industries where "Americans" also work or have worked? Doesn't make any sense to me!

mm, exactly right. Freedom includes the freedom to fail. Capitalism not only includes profits, which are characterized as greedy by the likes of cyclops, but it also includes losses. Profits and losses result into a constant adjustment and refinement of goods and services, weeding out the inferior products and providers of those products. Without allowing failure, you eliminate one of the big reasons why the free market works so well.

Thomas Sowell's Basic Economics book explains all of this so well. If only Obama and the entire Congress would read the book, and believe the obvious common sense of it, we would have some hope of returning sanity to this country. As it is, we are committing national suicide by going the way we are going. Obama's stimulus plan ignores the problems and continues the same old failed policies that got us here.