SubPar! Better, but still subpar!
REPUBLICANS GET RESULTS, BUT OBAMA THE GOD MUST BE ELECTED.
There, fixed that for you.
Posted by: Doug at June 26, 2008 1:02 PMThere's still hope for the sky is falling, only Big Government can get us out of this.
Two more quarters left before the election.
Posted by: set you free at June 26, 2008 1:44 PMI prefer to use the word subprime. . . Oh wait. . .
Posted by: KS at June 26, 2008 1:50 PMThere's been a lot of talk about whether the country has fallen into a recession. The new GDP statistics did not meet what analysts consider one definition of a recession -- two straight quarters of shrinking economic activity. But that didn't happen in the last recession in 2001, either
Ya gotta love the BS in this quote. No other definition of recession offered up. Yet, the last recession of 2001 wasn't really a recession according to the definition offered but still was a recession.
The next argument is that GDP stats are actually misleading and doesn't fully account for the recession that must be happening. Once again, no other definition this time of proper GDP accounting is profferred yet it is acceptable to use the current method of GDP accounting to refer back to the last non-recession recession but not to the current non-recession recession.
Oh yeah.
http://newsbusters.org/blogs/tom-blumer/2008/06/11/ask-ap-writers-response-recession-question-contradicts-her-reporting
Posted by: A. Cooper at June 26, 2008 2:06 PMhttp://newsbusters.org/blogs/tom-blumer/2008/06/11/ask-ap-writers-response-recession-question-contradicts-her-reporting
Posted by: A. Cooper at June 26, 2008 2:07 PMSorry for the double. My bad.
Posted by: A. Cooper at June 26, 2008 2:08 PMBelieve me, if the thought of impending lifestyle erosion at the hands of the dhimmi's after November wasn't foremost in my mind, I would be shopping around for a new vehicle in order to support the local economy.
Posted by: iowavette at June 26, 2008 2:12 PMActually I am surprised anybody puts any faith at all in the miniscule numbers purported to show a recovering economy.
As one US columnist pointed out awhile ago, the US feds are/were dumping fiat money into the system at an annualized rate of over $3 trillion per year.
A better measuring stick would be how far the stock market falls.
Will it be an official recession when the Dow is under 12000, or 11000, or 10000 or 9000...etc.
Some experts have compared the economy to a hurricane.
The first whack was the Bear Sterns failure and subsequent frantic federal moves seeming to contain the damage.
Now we are in the calm eye of the cane.
But the deluge of company layoffs, failures and chapter 11s , credit card defaults etc, will be the second whack to come.
BTW, I wonder which US leader is going to be the first to say 'austerity program'?
I don't understand the "Seven Year American Recession Watch Remains On High Alert" posts ...
The US ecconomy is facing higher unemployment, high inflation, low housing costs, and poor access to credit which is an awful combination of factors (and there are signs that it is getting worse). Most (true) conservatives identify this as being caused by out of control spending in the government, and a central bank which seems to like to flood the market with money. How is reporting on these problems anything but fair?
Posted by: NoOne at June 26, 2008 3:37 PMHow is reporting on these problems anything but fair?
If it were just a matter of reporting the situation instead of the continual selective headlines of doom it would be entirely "Fair".
As things stand .... not so much.
Posted by: OMMAG at June 26, 2008 4:06 PMNoOne.
cuz it aint a recession!
for seven years the MSM has been claiming doom and gloom and a recession and it aint happened.
The New York Times has been pushing their "W" shaped recesion since he took office, I know a stopped clock is occaisionally right, but this is ridiculout. You watch, the moment a Dem gets elected, the good times will be back, in the news coverage anyway, the numbers likely wont change though.
Posted by: Tim in Vermont at June 26, 2008 4:53 PMWhat is higher unemployment? Higher than europe, canada, most of the world?
Low cost housing a bad thing?
Too much access to credit helped cause a slow down.
Inflation not so good.
1 out of 4 for bad signs of the US economy.
And of course, Obama (who would be the medias answer) would slow down government growth and spending. Sure.
Posted by: Jay at June 26, 2008 4:58 PMI think that's kind of unlikely tim. When you've got reporters making random references to Obama making "terrorist fist jabs" with his wife, and accusing him of plagurism in his speeches (following which they play a supposed clip of a speech that he's plagiarized from, and yet literally there is no commonality to them whatsoever), you begin to wonder where the similarly ludicrous claims are against McCain...granted this is Fox News we're talking about, but still.
Side Note: I can't stand "Obama Mania" or whatever other irrelevant topics the MSM loves to fawn over.
Posted by: barjebus at June 26, 2008 5:29 PMThose screams are from the Obama camp because now there cannot be a recession before the November election.
So much for Democratic Strategy. Of course, the NYT's will just make it up and pretend there is one.
the dot com fiasco which was the biggest money grab in history was on slick willies watch.
Posted by: cal2 at June 26, 2008 5:45 PMNo One - this series was launched at a time when we were hearing a drumbeat of negative news about the US economy - while it was growing at a rate faster than our own. If we have lower unemployment rates, its a very recent development.
It's not about the US economy, which will experience its ups and downs like any other. It's
about the ridiculous, agenda driven, media coverage in which every good indicator is buried deep, in which improvement is always qualified and any negative aspect headlined.
Just as in the Reagan years, the economy flourished, poverty dropped, but the negative news reports outnumbered positive 6 - 1.
Posted by: Kate at June 26, 2008 6:50 PMCal2,
The dot com fiasco had nothing to do with politics. People were investing more money than they had on things that they do not understand. Period.
A combination of rapidly increasing stock prices, individual speculation in stocks, and widely available venture capital created an exuberant environment in which many of these businesses dismissed standard business models, focusing on increasing market share at the expense of the bottom line.
I'm not a Clintonista, but you have for Slick Willy what the MSM has for Bush II... that is some sort of personal derangement syndrome.
Posted by: Jon at June 26, 2008 6:51 PMOK, Kate. Have your laugh, but the numbers have been pointing to a recession (a.k.a. the sucking sound of all credit tapped out) for a number of years. Via tricks and treats at the Fed and outright lying of released data, it HAS been a long time coming.
This one is going to be very deep, very long, and very nasty. It's starting now and by mid next year should be close to a depression. Yes, a depression.
There's just no money in the U.S. system. Common practice was to use home equity loans to buy cars, exotic vacations, etc. One could always "expect" to sell a house at a handsome profit to cover the ridiculous mortgage (80 + 20 = 100%, no money down). Sound familiar? Plus maxed out credit cards, no savings, no reserves.
Now, no buyers, prices off nearly 30% YOY, no home equity money, no money for cars (iof they can afford the gas prices), and 40% of sub-prime and Alt-A mortgages will probably default/foreclose, if not more. REO's (Bank Repos of Houses) are at 12% now and climbing monthly in California, for example.
Just wait for it. Canada will be hit too, but on a delayed basis and (hopefully) not so much. Ontario is most at risk ... hugely, simply hugely. GM, Chrysler and Ford are in desperate straights. Ditto the financials who have been "looking good" by keeping the crap off their balance sheet. No more. Watch Citibank and some others over the next few days as their quarterly loan loss provisions (the small piece of the off-balance sheet stuff they have to include shows severe tanking.
In the meantime, ask Air Canada and the US carriers how they are doing. Resorts? Las Vegas? It's not pretty, and the meltdown is just beginning, with the perfect storm being coddled by the price of oil. In the "Inland Empire" part of California, houses aren't selling at all ... short sales (negative equity), new house sales, resales. The price of gas mitigates against long commutes, even if anyone had money to buy houses (ex the speculators). Hundreds of thousands of construction jobs gone ... poof. At least 125,000 financial jobs (Citi/BofA - 7,00 or so each), loan brokers, real estate agents, whole crap paper divisions of institutions, etc.
The UK is in the same state as the US, perhaps worse.
Posted by: burpnrun at June 26, 2008 9:40 PMOIL Futures are driving the market down:
If people lose confidence in the integrity of market regulators (manipulation for political purposes) all the normal indicators are meaningless....What investor is going to risk his money in "ANY" market if obvious corruption is ignored? What market could be considered honest? How many crooks are running amuck in the markets.
The two idiots running think they have time for a political solution, but theft will not be solved by political agendas and they don't have time IMO.
It is time for G.W Bush to step forward & declare the oil futures market corrupt! Shut it down & clean out the criminal speculation.
IT IS A NATIONAL CRISIS
Resorts? Las Vegas? It's not pretty, and the meltdown is just beginning
Really? I work for a major US hotel & resort chain and it is so busy that the company is offering incentives for us to work overtime.
Posted by: Toontown Kid at June 27, 2008 2:21 AM