114
   

Where is the US economy headed?

 
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  -1  
Reply Thu 11 Aug, 2011 05:26 pm
@spendius,
spendius wrote:

That's what they all say Cyclo at your stage. It just means you haven't been invited yet.


I get that, but I'm so happy right now, why go through all that rigamarole just to end up worse off than I am today?

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
georgeob1
 
  2  
Reply Thu 11 Aug, 2011 09:32 pm
@Cycloptichorn,
Have you considered the hypocrisy involved in that self-righteous bit of self inflated belligerence, following as it does your earlier rather prolongued tantrum about nonexistent references I supposedly overlooked in one of Thomas' posts? The contrast between your somewhat obsessive and highly exaggerated judgments here and mine to your very fundamental error there is rather stark as well. You diminish yourself.
Cycloptichorn
 
  -1  
Reply Thu 11 Aug, 2011 09:37 pm
@georgeob1,
Nobody's perfect, and when I'm wrong, I apologize for and admit it - which is more than be said for you, who usually ignores it.

Quote:
You diminish yourself.


Well, seeing as the alternative is admitting that there is validity to what I say, I'm sure you think so.

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  -1  
Reply Thu 11 Aug, 2011 11:13 pm
I'm in Uluru or Ayers Rock to most of you. We're at the airport waiting for our flight to Cairns. Will write again when I get the opportunity, but I've now lost about 7% of my investments so far, and expect to lose about 10% before it stabilizes to a sort of 'bottom.'
JPB
 
  1  
Reply Fri 12 Aug, 2011 05:51 am
@cicerone imposter,
I took advantage of yesterday's rising prices and moved a full year's college costs for both girls over to a money market account. I don't have time to wait for a recovery there. I may move more if things drop much more. Otherwise, I'm staying put.
0 Replies
 
revelette
 
  1  
Reply Fri 12 Aug, 2011 07:14 am
Corporate Coffers Have Surged 59% Since 2008 Crisis, but Some Executives Say Spending Now Is Risky; 'We're Going to be Cautious

Quote:
Companies have been socking cash away for a rainy day since the financial crisis. Now, it's pouring—and companies feel prepared.

Non-financial companies in the Standard & Poor's 500-stock index were holding $1.12 trillion in cash and short-term investments in their most recent reports, up 59% from $703 billion in the third quarter of 2008. Those stockpiles are providing companies with a cushion of comfort amid the economic and market turmoil.

Yet the validation of companies' conservatism may ultimately be bad news for the economy. The recent turmoil affirms executives' caution, and may prompt some to curb spending and bolster their ...


(not a subscriber)

Why are these companies and others not hiring? They are paying lower taxes, they are making a profit, yet they don't hire because they want to save for a rainy day? How do they expect the economy to remain sunny if most of the work force in the country is out of work?
JPB
 
  1  
Reply Fri 12 Aug, 2011 07:27 am
@revelette,
Your question was answered within the quote.

Quote:
The recent turmoil affirms executives' caution, and may prompt some to curb spending and bolster their ...


They're waiting for us (we the people as represented by our government) to get our collective **** together before they wade back into the pond.
revelette
 
  1  
Reply Fri 12 Aug, 2011 09:54 am
@JPB,
I am betting you know about how long profits have been up in corporations than I do. So, assuming profits have been up since before the recent events in congress, (if that is what the collective stuff is) what was their excuse before that?
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Fri 12 Aug, 2011 09:57 am
@JPB,
JPB wrote:

Your question was answered within the quote.

Quote:
The recent turmoil affirms executives' caution, and may prompt some to curb spending and bolster their ...


They're waiting for us (we the people as represented by our government) to get our collective **** together before they wade back into the pond.


Oh, c'mon. Corporate boards aren't sitting around wringing their hands over the state of politics - they are responding to a simple lack of demand.

If the demand for their services was there, they'd be hiring and expanding, no matter what the political climate is.

Cycloptichorn
JPB
 
  1  
Reply Fri 12 Aug, 2011 10:03 am
@revelette,
Part greed, part stock market support as we came out of the recession. Most Americans now depend on their 401Ks for their future (or current, in the case of the elderly) security. Record profits were seen in 2010 and the markets responded accordingly. It isn't just the affluent who depend on corporate profits for their financial well-being. Middle America is as tied to them as anyone else.
0 Replies
 
JPB
 
  1  
Reply Fri 12 Aug, 2011 10:04 am
@Cycloptichorn,
I disagree, but that's ok. Why would someone choose to expand in today's climate? We aren't talking about hiring for existing demand. There is none. We're talking about expansionary hiring into new areas of R&D.
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Fri 12 Aug, 2011 10:09 am
@JPB,
JPB wrote:

I disagree, but that's ok. Why would someone choose to expand in today's climate? We aren't talking about hiring for existing demand. There is none. We're talking about expansionary hiring into new areas of R&D.


New R&D doesn't exist unless there's enough demand to drive expansion of the core business, or at the very least to maintain sales where they are. All you're going to do with new R&D is end up laying out a bunch of cash to start something up, in an economy which people and businesses have much less disposable income than they did 5 years ago.

It's a demand issue, plain and simple. Tortured explanations about 'animal emotions' driving business are usually without merit and are unprovable. We can look at a wide variety of business and economic climates throughout American history, and many were just as contentious as today - if not more so - with more regulatory changes looming on the horizon. During ALL these time periods, businesses expanded as long as demand was there.

We ought to be stimulating demand right now through fiscal policy, but the Fed is sitting on it's hands, and the Republicans in gov't don't give a **** about anything getting better until they have someone in the WH.

Cycloptichorn
JPB
 
  1  
Reply Fri 12 Aug, 2011 10:19 am
@Cycloptichorn,
Quote:
... the Republicans in gov't don't give a **** about anything getting better until they have someone in the WH.

I agree with you there.
0 Replies
 
JPB
 
  1  
Reply Fri 12 Aug, 2011 10:29 am
Ten US housing markets that are expected to drop at least another 10% this year.
Quote:
The real estate market is already in the deepest depression in modern U.S. history. If you think it can’t get any worse, think again.

In several cities, the real estate market is about to drop even more. Home values in many of those cities, such as Las Vegas, have already collapsed as unemployment has shot higher. And with no hope of quick recovery, housing prices are expected to continue to fall. 24/7 Wall St. identified ten housing markets that are expected to drop by at least another 10 percent by 2012. Full list

JPB
 
  1  
Reply Fri 12 Aug, 2011 10:31 am
Also, don't forget all the option-ARMs that are due to be reset this year.
http://bp3.blogger.com/_pMscxxELHEg/RxzD0s_7EYI/AAAAAAAABB4/ljDSXZhMG3o/s400/IMFresets.jpg
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Fri 12 Aug, 2011 10:32 am
@JPB,
Great - perhaps I'll be able to afford a house out here after all.

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
JPB
 
  1  
Reply Fri 12 Aug, 2011 10:38 am
@Cycloptichorn,
Not that either of these guys are on my list of favorite folks, but they do (or did) control a whole lot of cash.

Quote:
The hope is that recent signs of a weakening economy, the stock market sell-off and the loss of AAA credit status will provide a new sense of urgency to the committee's work. But some business executives remain skeptical that Congress and the White House will be able to fashion a package that gets the economy moving again.

"The uncertainty is not the problem, it's the certainty that's the problem," said Harvey Golub, former American Express CEO and former AIG Chairman. "We know that until the next presidential election in this country we're going to pursue policies that will be different from the rhetoric. We will say what we want to do is grow GDP and create jobs, but the policies that will be put in place will do the opposite."

<snip>

That uncertainty — more than the cuts themselves — could weigh most heavily on growth. The longer government policies continue to shift, the longer it will take to get the economy moving again, according to Wells Fargo chief economist John Silvia.

"You have a payroll tax cut and then you don't. You don't know if you are going to have the Bush tax cuts or not. You have Cash For Clunkers and then you don't. You can't do that," he said. "You are asking people to make permanent decisions in terms of hiring and spending money, and then you give all these temporary policy moves. It doesn't work that way."
Source
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Fri 12 Aug, 2011 10:42 am
@JPB,
I know you prefaced by saying that these folks aren't on your list, but I gotta say that the chairman of AIG is probably the worst qualification one could have for making statements that could be considered trustworthy.

AIG was a giant shell game, where different elements of the company insured each other - a house of cards that never could have survived a shock to it's system. Their chairman knew this was true and didn't give a ****; why should I trust what he says about the business climate? The guy is a crook and a liar.

Cycloptichorn
JPB
 
  1  
Reply Fri 12 Aug, 2011 10:45 am
@Cycloptichorn,
Only in that he's spent his career on that side of the fence. Rev asked about companies sitting on cash and not hiring. He's giving a valid answer from the business perspective.
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Fri 12 Aug, 2011 10:51 am
@JPB,
JPB wrote:

Only in that he's spent his career on that side of the fence. Rev asked about companies sitting on cash and not hiring. He's giving a valid answer from the business perspective.


How do you know he's telling the truth about the business climate, and not just giving his own personal opinion about what policies will benefit him the most? The guy has already proven, by his past associations, that he's not entirely interested in what's right and wrong, per se; but in what will profit him and his cronies to the maximum extent.

Sorry if that sounds harsh, but AIG was a major player in the financial crash that fucked all of us. The leaders of that company should all be in jail right now. Instead, nothing at all happened to any of them, most of whom are still fantastically rich. Whatever he says is as likely to be a complete and total lie as it is an objective truth.

Cyclopticyhorn
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 © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.1 seconds on 04/19/2024 at 04:34:51